> On May 13, 2015, at 02:57, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote: > > RAT just checks that we use an Apache compatible license- which we do > already, however it's not the proper ASF license header. It still assigns > the copyright to the Regents, not the ASF.
I think this is what I remembered, not RAT: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-update-scripts > For repackaging, I hope that Eclipse's or IntelliJ's refactoring > capabilities will do the trick, however I'm not at all certain. I think > you're right though that sed should just work, I think > s/edu.uci.ics/org.apache/g would cover 99.9% of the necessary changes. I did a small script yesterday and it nearly worked (dcache caused some trouble, but that's fixable). Cheers, Till >> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 8:33 PM, Till Westmann <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I think that there’s a tool that does that for you. And I think that it’s >> RAT, isn’t it? >> So then that should be easy. >> Do you know if there’s also a tool for repackaging? >> But actually, sed is probably fine as we probably don’t have a lot of UCI >> dependencies that are not part of Hyracks. >> Is that right? >> >> Cheers, >> Till >> >> >>> On May 12, 2015, at 7:24 PM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> That all seems reasonable. Also agreed about it being part of the first >>> Apache release. Another thing along those lines that came to mind while >>> trying to get the RAT plugin to work is that we need to modify all of our >>> source headers too... >>> >>> - Ian >>> >>>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Till Westmann <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> I think that we should. And I think that we should do it in the context >> of >>>> producing our first Apache-release. >>>> >>>> Maybe we can start by releasing the current Hyracks version? >>>> >>>> I think that there are a number of things that we need to do to be able >> to >>>> do that. >>>> One thing the comes to mind is the repackaging to org.apache.* packages. >>>> And then we'll need to make sure that our artifact conform to the >> release >>>> policy [1] (it also contains a link to a document that discusses the >>>> publishing of maven artifacts [2]). >>>> >>>> Does this make sense? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Till >>>> >>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html >>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/publishing-maven-artifacts.html >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 6:49 PM, Ian Maxon <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> Right now we store our artifacts on a build server running Nexus ( >>>>> obelix.ics.uci.edu). Should we instead now, be using an Apache >>>>> infrastructure provided repository for our Maven artifacts (releases, >>>> etc)? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> - Ian >>>>> >>>> >> >>
