On 11/3/13 8:29 PM, janI wrote: > On 3 November 2013 19:23, Ariel Constenla-Haile <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 01:47:54AM +0100, janI wrote: >>>> The project must do ratscans actively. PMC members need the ratscan >>>> output in order to review IP License compliance. When you +1 >>>> a release this is something that PMC members must check. This is >>>> more important to get correct than the code quality. >>> >>> This is an interesting statement, I have never been presented with >>> a ratscan output even though I was PMC member when we voted for both >>> 4.0 and 4.0.1. I highly agree that ratscan is important, but I cannot >>> find the output in svn, would it not be a natural place to have it >>> together with the release ? >> >> It looks like you didn't do your homework before voting, Jürgen usually >> posts the link to the ratscan output in the [VOTE] thread, for example: >> http://markmail.org/message/dtyu2zisyvismaqg >> http://markmail.org/message/cquhuieawf4jbx6j >> > > it sure looks like it, thx for correcting me. > > >> >> Besides, build-bot openoffice-linux64-rat runs the target weekly: >> http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/ >> > > that runs on trunk, and not on the branches.
it runs on trunk to detect problems early. For the release I triggered it on the related branch. And sure we can automate this further. But I believe having it and running it regularly on trunk is enough. All committers should think about a correct license header if they create new files or should check all license relevant issues if they plan to use a new external library. Juergen > > rgds > jan I. > > >> >> >> Regards >> -- >> Ariel Constenla-Haile >> La Plata, Argentina >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
