On 03/05/2012 14:52, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
> Hi !
>
> /me Checking the release atm. So far, nothing blocking. I'm not
> totally done but I have a few comments :
>
> - When you start a new vote, say so by adding a number in the subject
> (like "[Vote] Apache Syncope...; Take 3"). It helps people to not get
> lost...
You're right, even though I would hope this won't be the case for each
vote in the future... :-)
> - I still have some files with no license with running mvn rat:check :
> core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.identityconnectors.common.logging
>
> core/src/test/resources/test.csv
>
> AFAICT, those two files have no reason to have a license, and I guess
> that it's covered in the apache-rat-plugin configuration. Can you
> confirm that the check should be done with mvn apache-rat:check ? In
> any case, I won't vote -1 because of those two files, just want to be
> sure.
As reported in the email body, apache-rat:check should be run, not
rat:check; the latter has no configuration in our project, while the
former does.
The reasons for preferring apache-rat over rat are:
* apache-rat is included in Apache POM 10, not rat
* rat is obsolete, as reported by
http://mojo.codehaus.org/rat-maven-plugin/
Regards.
--
Francesco Chicchiriccò
Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member
http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
|