On 12/21/16, 10:12 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala" <omup...@gmail.com on behalf of bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 21, 2016 9:52 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > >On 12/21/16, 9:10 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala" ><omup...@gmail.com on behalf of bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Chris, any chance we can disable the rat check by default? I got hit by >>that as well. Seems like a common place that could trip people up. > >The Rat check is useful. It helps make sure things are cleaned up >properly. I have a two separate working copy of the repos. I build Ant >in one and Maven in the other. > >I see. So if the mvn clean goes well, the rat check should always pass? > Yes. Unless there is some new file that needs excluding or a header. It sort of means that Ant clean/wipe whatever isn't fully cleaning everything, but in Peter's case there was an output folder that wasn't cleaned up because when we switched folder names a while back the Ant script cleans up the new folder name and doesn't clean up the old folder name. I suppose we could keep delete tasks around for all folder names, but that doesn't seem quite right either. So from a freshly checked out repo, Ant should clean/wipe and allow Maven to run, but for an old working copy that has survived folder renaming, it may not work. Having two working copies just saves me time because you must clean/wipe via Ant before running Maven and clean Maven before going back to Ant and download all of the dependencies again. Yes, Ant could be tuned so this isn't a problem, but I haven't spent time one it because for me it is just faster two keep two working copies around. -Alex
