On 22 September 2013 08:13, Mark Derricutt <m...@talios.com> wrote: > On 22/09/2013, at 9:28 AM, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote: > > A check is performed to ensure that each file in the source archive is > present in the release revision > > > Should that not be the other way around? That every file in the git clone > should be in the source archive? Or vice versa, that should be neither > more, or less files?
The point of checking the source archive against the SCM tag is to ensure that all the files in the source release have got the correct license clearance. It is assumed that license conditions are checked when content is added to SCM, because that is in the CLA signed by committers. If there are files in the SCM tag that are not in the source release, that is generally not a problem as far as licensing is concerned (thought it's possible that the NOTICE/LICENSE files might need adjusting to take account of the missing files). Of course the missing files may be important for the functioning of the code - that is a separate matter. Ideally the two file sets agree, with the possible exception of some files that only belong in SCM, e.g. .gitignore is not needed in the source archive, and it does not make much sense to release a DOAP file. There may be some other SCM-only files. But I agree any discrepancies need to be investigated. > Mark > > -- > Mark Derricutt — twitter — podcast — blog — google+ > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
