I've filed ACCUMULO-2927 to make 'git clean -df' sufficient. No matter how we decide about the rat plugin, I think not requiring -x is a worthwhile goal.
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that instructing users to use this option to modify the build isn't > acceptable and I wouldn't recommend this as a response to users... I was > only stating this as a fact, to point out that a special profile on by > default with an option to disable isn't needed, since that's the current > behavior. > > I'm more interested in the targeted .gitignore with the recommended "git > clean -df" option without -x. This helps contributors understand build > tools, makes them aware of the differences between branches, and doesn't > hide problems introduced by switching branches in an obscure error, all > without blowing away their IDE build files. (though switching branches > often warrants blowing these IDE files away anyway, since different modules > in different branches will be problematic for most IDEs). > > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Alex Moundalexis <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > This kind of response is hardly conducive to prospective contributors. > > > > We should consider ourselves lucky whenever a contributor provides a > patch, > > let alone runs a build. Expecting a new contributor be fully aware of the > > Apache licensing details isn't realistic, much less being aware of the > > arguments concerning Rat; if the ignoreErrors argument is TheWay, it > ought > > to be mentioned prominently in the source documentation [1], but I don't > > think that's correct either... > > > > I don't want to encourage contributors to skip the build. I want > > contributors to be aware of the licensing requirements, but not at the > > expense of providing otherwise-viable patches. I'd recommend relaxing the > > Rat checks for contributors, and making it a required part of the profile > > for automated Jenkins builds and during the release process. > > > > The onus should be on the committers to ensure that all of the licensing > is > > in place before the release, but preferably long before that point by > > guiding the contributor to make the necessary license additions before > the > > commit. > > > > I've been told to correct whitespace at the end of a line before and to > > re-submit a patch, seems trivial to address missing licensing files in > the > > same way. > > > > [1] https://accumulo.apache.org/source.html > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Christopher <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > There's already a way to skip it for those who don't understand why its > > > failing and are incapable/unwilling to troubleshoot: > > > -Drat.ignoreErrors=true > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Christopher L Tubbs II > > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Billie Rinaldi < > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm not thrilled about turning it off by default. How about putting > it > > > in > > > > a profile that would be enabled by default, but could be disabled > with > > a > > > > flag for those who don't understand why it's failing? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:44 AM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > I've had a few different new-to-Accumulo contributors recently run > > into > > > > the > > > > > issue of Rat failing the build after changing branches. > > > > > > > > > > I know we already have a warning about this[1], but AFAICT it's > over > > > the > > > > > threshold for consumable information. > > > > > > > > > > Even after pointing people to the warning, the existing workaround > > > > tripped > > > > > up atleast one of them. Despite the warning about using "git > clean," > > > the > > > > > destruction of their local IDE changes were surprising. > > > > > > > > > > For contributions to Accumulo that aren't coming from committers, > the > > > Rat > > > > > plugin seems much more likely to give a false positive than to > catch > > an > > > > > error. Additionally, whatever committer is reviewing the > contribution > > > > > should be checking for license compliance anyways. > > > > > > > > > > In the interests of reducing the surprise for new contributors, I'd > > > like > > > > to > > > > > move our use of Rat to a profile that is only default enabled > during > > a > > > > > release run. > > > > > > > > > > The profile would still let those who want rat to run on every > build > > to > > > > > enable it and we could update the guide for handling new > > contributions > > > to > > > > > say committers should enable the rat profile to help guard against > > > > errors. > > > > > > > > > > Any objections? > > > > > > > > > > [1]: http://accumulo.apache.org/source.html#running-a-build > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Sean > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- // Bill Havanki // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions // 443.686.9283
