On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:53 AM, Sravya Tirukkovalur <[email protected]>wrote:
> That is in fact a good point raised to revisit our excludes to make sure > we do not have any unnecessary ones. Me and Jarcec did some brainstorming > around this and looks like most of the excludes we have are for better > developer usability, which mostly exclude some generated files. > > 1) Git specific files that might not contain headers: > > <exclude>.git/</exclude> > > <exclude>.gitignore</exclude> > > 2) IDE specific files that we are ignoring to make live easier for > developers: > > <exclude>.idea/</exclude> > > <exclude>**/*.iml</exclude> > > <exclude>**/nb-configuration.xml</exclude> > > <exclude>**/.settings/**</exclude> > > <exclude>**/.classpath</exclude> > > <exclude>**/.project</exclude> > > 3) Maven working directory: > > <exclude>**/target/</exclude> > > 4) Pre commit testing generated files > > <exclude>maven-repo/</exclude> > > <exclude>test-output/</exclude> > > 5) Derby files that can be created after test run > > <exclude>*.log</exclude> > > <exclude>**/*.lck</exclude> > > <exclude>**/service.properties</exclude> > > 6) Patch files that can be easily lying around > > <exclude>**.patch</exclude> > > 7) Our readme file > > <exclude>README*</exclude> > > 8) Test data with exact format > > <exclude>**/kv1.dat</exclude> > > 9) Self explaining: > > <!-- exclude generated solr config files --> > > <exclude>**/solr/collection1/conf/**</exclude> > > <!-- exclude generated thrift files → > > <exclude>**/gen/**</exclude> > > X) Not sure what this is for, to be removed? > > <exclude>**/.metadata/</exclude> > Looks like this is also an eclipse artifact: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7279992/should-i-regularly-delete-the-metadata-folder-from-the-eclipse-workspace-what > So I feel confident that we are in good shape with respect to excludes. > David, does this break down look ok? > > Regards, > > > On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 10:37 AM, David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi David, >> > thank you very much for your feedback, greatly appreciated! You've >> raised couple of really good points. >> > >> > The rat issues is interesting - indeed we are not setting the >> excludeSubProjects to false but at the same time rat is checking all >> subprojects. I've just tried to put incorrectly licensed file into one of >> the sub modules and it has been correctly detected, so I'm assuming that >> this one should be covered. >> > >> >> The bigger issue isn't rat configuration, it's how do we answer the >> question of why so many files don't have license headers. >> >> > Looking at the rest of the feedback it seems that nothing is a release >> blocker per say, so I'm wondering if you are fine with us moving forward >> with the release? >> > >> >> My vote is just a single vote, nothing says you have to stop. -1's >> aren't vetoes in release votes. I personally want to get to the point >> where I can vote +1 but am not there yet. >> >> --David >> > > > > -- > Sravya Tirukkovalur > -- Sravya Tirukkovalur
