On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 6:41 PM, simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > At the moment we have a slightly odd situation with license headers > in .java files within myfaces projects. > > In some projects, the license header looks like this: > > * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file > > while in other projects it looks like this: > > * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file > > Note the extra space after the leading asterisk. In addition, the one in > the 1.2.x line also has two lines of " * ", where the 1.1.x line uses > just " *". > > The checkstyle rule that checks license headers against a "known" piece > of text therefore has problems. > > There are three ways to deal with this: > (1) Do a mass replace of headers so every myfaces project uses one style > (2) Require each mvn module to use one license style consistently > internally, but allow different projects to use different styles. > Checkstyle must then be configured to use the right header template for > each project. > (3) Use the checkstyle "regular expression header matcher" for the > headers, so that whitespace differences are allowed. > > In the recently released checkstyle module I included three different > headers so that both (2) and (3) are possible. > > Currently I'm taking approach (2), ie for each project as I enable > checkstyle checking I'm fixing up header text on files to match the > "majority" of other files in the same project. > > Are people ok with that? > > > > > Just FYI, the reason for this difference in the shared 2.x vs 3.x lines > appears to be as follows (I expect the same happened to other projects): > * 2.x line of shared was branched for JSF1.2 on r412299 > * in the 2.x line, grantsmith cleaned up the license headers in > r472618 > * in the 3.x line, matzew cleaned up the license headers in r557350 > > The license headers did need cleaning up, because at the point that the > two lines diverged, the files still had the old "copyright YYYY" style > license text. So both branches had this old stuff that needed to be > replaced. But Grant used one license text template, and Matthias used a > different one.
I am fine with what ever works for you simon, since you actually do the work, I guess ;) -M > > Regards, > Simon > > > > -- Matthias Wessendorf further stuff: blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
