Agreed. That's a minimum.
-- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Bill Havanki <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >
