Hi Nick,
I hope I have some answers for you:
- I agree, the license headers should be the ASF headers and we should
change that. But I don't think that's a blocker for this release.
- The shell scripts are not part of the release. No need to add the
headers here.
- There are a few files that are generated by the IDE over and over
again. Adding a header after each iteration is not feasible (and may
make the files defective?).
- Some of the test data files could have a license header without
breaking the tests. But they are not needed to compile and use the
library. If they were missing only a few tests would fail. Do you think
that's a blocker?
Florian
On Wed, 26 Dec 2012, Florian Müller wrote:
We haven't setup RAT, but we made sure that there is a README file,
a NOTICE file, a LICENSE file, all source files have an Apache header,
etc.
Couple of things from a quick check (which may not be a blocker).
Firstly, some of the files look to have the public license header,
rather than the version normally used for ASF works:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
Secondly, some of the shell scripts are missing the header, as are
some of the test + project xml files. Possibly the shell scripts are
too small to need it, and maybe the test files can't have it? Any
chance someone could either add the headers in if they're needed, or
confirm if not?
Thanks
Nick
