Hi, Bertrand

Can you help to answer a specific question to Apache Rat?

For some short JavaScript files, we want to use short form of Apache license 
header.
But I found Apache Rat cannot recognize short form headers.
Do you know how to handler this situation?
Besides Rat, are there any other tools that can help audit headers in a release?

Best regards
Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)


-----Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org> wrote: -----
To: dev@openwhisk.apache.org
From: Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org>
Date: 02/09/2018 06:41PM
Subject: Re: Release policy compliance: Adding license headers and the excluded 
files

Hi Daisy,

On Thu, Feb 8, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Ying Chun Guo <guoyi...@cn.ibm.com> wrote:
> ...I use Apache Rat to audit license headers. I use wskdeploy repo as the 
> trial repo.
> I reported an issue 
> (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_apache_incubator-2Dopenwhisk-2Dwskdeploy_issues_716&d=DwIBaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=V_NQebMEsahq0wRsMMLN8VHG-pcqPRpdHygvo4rmK4o&m=m3ygIAacPw2tdx9MhWLfpLzsW1V32RO3z5g6A2YFWCo&s=zY3fWnnLVXjHDVQvYS73Db0ljWoQg4OaYlqNm1mbjWE&e=)
> to wskdeploy including a report generated by Apache Rat. In the report, all 
> the files
> with unapproved licenses will be listed...

This sounds great.

What you want basically is that for any build that's meant to create a release:

-Rat should run
-The build should fail if Rat reports any anomalies
-The Rat exclusions should ideally be defined in the same way for all
modules, for consistency
-The Rat exclusions should be commented to indicate why each exclusion
(or family of exclusions) is here

I think this should be documented in a "coding standards" or "release
management" page, does OpenWhisk have this already?

-Bertrand (with my incubation mentor hat on)


Reply via email to