I think it’s a good suggestion, please move ahead to enable it by default and fix the missing license headers.
Thanks, Hao On 1/5/16, 5:58 AM, "Don Bosco Durai" <[email protected]> wrote: >I agree, it is better if it is enabled by default. At least in Ranger we have >seen builds failing and we scrambling to fix the build. > >Bosco > > > > >On 1/2/16, 11:51 PM, "Prasad Mujumdar" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Hey Hao, >> >> Thanks for clarifying that. >> >>When it's forced in the build, the owners is on every developer to ensure >>that the new files have the correct license header. They can fix any >>missing files locally (or add an exception when applicable). Keeping this >>in CI or release build makes the process longer and requires more iteration >>for each patch/release. >>Let me know if it's still preferred in CI. The header updates in the PR are >>still needed. >> >>thanks >>Prasad >> >> >>On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Hao Chen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Prasad, >>> >>> Thanks for it. We declared RAT in pom plugin management and enable by >>> command arguments when necessary but not forcefully, which would be added >>> in CI. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Hao >>> >>> > On Jan 3, 2016, at 12:01 PM, Prasad Mujumdar <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hello Hao, >>> > >>> > There's RAT plugin defined under plugin management, however it's not >>> > enabled. Also there are a number of files that are missing the license >>> > header. I just submitted the PR #51 [2] that adds license header to 26 >>> > files, plus the ones under webapp still needs to be handled. >>> > >>> > thanks >>> > Prasad >>> > >>> > [2] - https://github.com/apache/incubator-eagle/pull/51 >>> > >>> >> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 7:18 PM, Hao Chen <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> RAT has already been enabled in the pom when open source. >>> >> >>> >>>> On Jan 3, 2016, at 6:30 AM, Edward Zhang <[email protected]> >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Good point to have tools to identify missing license header, we should >>> >> have >>> >>> that. >>> >>> >>> >>> In terms of license headers under eagle-webservice, I remembered there >>> >> was >>> >>> some discussion on the license of those files, probably Jilin can >>> provide >>> >>> more details. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> >>> >>> Edward >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Prasad Mujumdar <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Hi, >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Looks like we have a bunch of files that are missing the Apache >>> >> license >>> >>>> headers. IMO it's a good idea to add the Maven RAT plugin to ensure >>> that >>> >>>> every new file has license header. Otherwise the responsibility falls >>> on >>> >>>> the release manager's head to correct it and makes the release process >>> >>>> longer and tedious. >>> >>>> I have logged a ticket EAGLE-114 [1] to track it and got a working >>> patch >>> >>>> that I can submit a PR. One of the problem fileset is the webapp under >>> >>>> eagle-webservice. There are a large number of files which don't have >>> >>>> license header. I would like to create a separate ticket to track >>> which >>> >>>> files should have the header and which should be excluded. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> Let me know if that sounds reasonable. >>> >>>> >>> >>>> thanks >>> >>>> Prasad >>> >>>> >>> >>>> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EAGLE-114 >>> >> >>> >
