On 5/10/07, Jean T. Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Dudziak wrote:
1) The distributions aren't signed.
Yeah, that's because it is not a distribution, it's a special nightly build if you want. The final release will of course be signed (I've written part of the doc for how to that :-) )
2) Are you going to include a src distribution? --It looks like DdlUtils-1.0-RC1.jar just has class files.
I was not sure about that. Is it common practice ? I probably should, I guess ...
3) I don't see a LICENSE or NOTICE file [1].
There are there (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/db/ddlutils/trunk/). Though I'm slightly confused, do we use txt file extension or not ?
4) I didn't run RAT, but I did run the insert_license.pl [2] script in the committer's repo in practice mode. Lots of files have the old Apache header in place.
That's odd. I did a sweep after Cliff announced the new header on the legal discuss mailing list. Did it change in the meantime (AL-20a ?) Anyway, I wanted to run Robert's tool anyways, so that will be fixed then, but thanks spotting this, really odd, I tried to make sure that that is already ok.
These files are missing the header: ddlutils/src/test-input/test-start.xml, extension=.xml, fileType=xml, Insert new license ddlutils/src/test-input/datamodel.xml, extension=.xml, fileType=xml, Insert new license ddlutils/src/xml/database2ojb.xsl, extension=.xsl, fileType=xml, Insert new license ddlutils/src/java/org/apache/ddlutils/task/VerbosityLevel.java, extension=.java, fileType=C, Insert new license
Ah, thanks, the license check in the build script probably doesn't check them.
5) In DdlUtils-1.0-RC1-doc.zip , the Copyright put into the forrest-generated footers is 2005. Is that correct? Or does the forrest skinconf.xml need to be updated?
Ups, got to change that
that's all I've found so far ....
thanks a lot, Jean ! cheers, Tom
