I sent PR # 231 [1] to (hopefully) deal with this. The license and checkstyle checks will be on for the the following profiles:
-dev - used by developers -tests - used by Jenkins for regression tests, including nightly tests -fast-tests - used to verify pull requests -release - used when releasing (duh) They're off for everything else. Justin [1] https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/pull/231 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Bish" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2015 9:35:51 AM Subject: Re: Artemis with License Checks on PR/s build On 05/06/2015 10:24 AM, Andy Taylor wrote: > which I think is fine. it doesnt matter for users who are just > building from source, its only an issue for contributions which the PR > build is there to catch Agreed, the users should be able to work however they are comfortable and let the automation handle the checks. > > On 06/05/15 15:21, Clebert Suconic wrote: >> That's the kind of thing that won't happen.. people will just ignore it >> >> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Andy Taylor <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> or document how to enable it so users can turn it on if they want >>> >>> >>> On 06/05/15 15:16, Clebert Suconic wrote: >>>> >>>> The thing is.. we will have more failures on the PR builds.. .I would >>>> rather have people getting issues at their code. >>>> >>>> >>>> Perhaps you could just document how to disable on README.. and make it >>>> easy for users to disable it. >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Andy Taylor <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Personally I prefer it just to be run on PR's, not everyone that >>>>> build >>>>> from >>>>> source is bothered about it. I think users should be able to build >>>>> from >>>>> source no matter what they have in their source tree, log files, >>>>> users >>>>> own >>>>> source etc. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 06/05/15 14:54, Clebert Suconic wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> So, the poms now have the RAT check enabled. That means we would get >>>>>> our own mistakes instead of wasting server's time resource with a >>>>>> failed PR. >>>>>> I think that's the right way to do it... we wouldn't waste server's >>>>>> time resource on failed PRs... and wouldn't waste anyone's time on >>>>>> looking at PRs for that kind of error. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, I'm strongly in favor on keeping the check on on the builds. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there anyone with a different opinion on this.. and on that >>>>>> case,, >>>>>> why? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 7:57 PM, Clebert Suconic >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Just a heads up, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Justin Bertram has enabled license checks on the build again, >>>>>>> and the >>>>>>> PR checks... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, from now on committing java files without headers won't get un >>>>>>> noticed without a build failure ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> > > -- Tim Bish Sr Software Engineer | RedHat Inc. [email protected] | www.redhat.com twitter: @tabish121 blog: http://timbish.blogspot.com/
