Responses inline. On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 11:46 PM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Mar 16, 2016, at 1:36 AM, amareshwarisr . <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > - Unit tests failed, details below > > I’ll state, for the record, that it’s OK make a release with unit tests > that fail. You just have to decide, as a community, that all unit tests > passing is not a goal of the release. README.md says “ mvn -DskipTests > clean package”, so I didn’t bother to run tests. Obviously it would be > better if unit tests succeeded. But at this point, I wouldn’t let failing > tests derail a release. > > Yes. I agree. I would vote +1 on the next candidate even if unit tests fail. But it would be good if they succeed. > > - Rat-check (mvn apache-rat:check) fails. Not all files have source > > headers. See http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html. Details > below. > > None of the files that are missing source headers concern me. (For > example, it is not possible to add source headers to .json files, because > the JSON standard does not allow comments.) They could be fixed in the next > release by adding rat-exclusions. > > Agree with json files. But there are html files and log files getting included in source. I feel you would definitely need source headers for html files. and avoid including log files in source, if you can. > I have not looked into amareshwarisr’s concerns about LICENSE. > > Julian
