Good to know. Thanks ! On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Paul Guo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Unless the license header could not be practically added (e.g. .ans files > for test). > You will need to add the file(s) in pom.xml to avoid RAT check for this > case. > > 2017-01-28 5:07 GMT+08:00 Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]>: > > > Actually, you really are required to apply license header to every file > > nowdays. > > > > Thanks, > > Roman. > > > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Shivram Mani <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > In that case, can we just apply the license header to every file ? > > > These files in question are configurations which would also be > controlled > > > by Mgmt tools such as Ambari. > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:50 AM, David Yozie <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > >> We had the same question around the docs source files. Seems like > > there's > > >> roughly an even split of projects that do/don't include the license in > > each > > >> file. > > >> > > >> -David > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Shivram Mani <[email protected] > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> > Are we supposed to add the Apache License header comment to every > > file in > > >> > the hawq repo ? > > >> > Currently the classpath files under > > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-hawq/tree/master/ > > >> > pxf/pxf-service/src/main/resources > > >> > don't have the header info. > > >> > Is that something we need to add to those files as well ? > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > shivram mani > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > shivram mani > > > -- shivram mani
