Hi Jan,
jan i schrieb:
HI.
did anybody note the rat-scan output, seems we have 6 files still that are
a problem (a probably should be deleted):
Unapproved Licenses:
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaOOXMLParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath
/home/buildslave19/slave19/openofficeorg-nightly-rat/build/main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project
I had submitted the patch from Gavin McDonald. But that patch contains
the lines
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.classpath
===================================================================
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/JavaPartManager/.project
===================================================================
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml
and
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.classpath
===================================================================
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml
Index: main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.project
===================================================================
Cannot display: file marked as a binary type.
svn:mime-type = application/xml
so for those no change exists in the patch. I read that, but did not
notice the consequence.
The files
main/ooxml/source/framework/OOXMLViewer/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
+main/ooxml/source/framework/SchemaParser/.settings/org.eclipse.jdt.core.prefs
should have entries in rat-excludes, at least I see that in the commit
message of r1684976.
Kind regards
Regina
rgds
jan i.
On 16 June 2015 at 08:27, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11/06/15 18:23, jan i wrote:
On 8 June 2015 at 16:58, Regina Henschel <rb.hensc...@t-online.de>
wrote:
Hi Jürgen,
is it OK to commit the patch?
if it not ok to commit the patch, then I wonder how the files was
committed
in the first place.
If it is not ok, then the files should be deleted. We cannot have files
in
trunk without the proper
ALv2 license.
Furthermore we cannot make a release with these files.
I recommend applying the patch. Deleting the files might have
sideeffects.
No it have no sideeffect and yes it is ok to apply the patch. As I
explained before these files are part of the started but currently
stopped new OOXML framework. It's part of the parser generator ...
Anyway it is a eclipse project in Java and the license headers were
simply forgotten in the first shot. If you want a Java tooling that
would have created C++ stubs and parser for doing the ground work for
OOXML parsing ...
Again these files should not be part of y source release and can be
filtered out as some other things as well.
Applying the patch and adding the license header is even better and more
clean for future purpose.
Juergen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
