On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 01:02 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-04-29 at 22:26 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote: > >> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: > >>> On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 16:11 -0700, Luciano Resende wrote: > >>>> You should consider that some files that currently does not have a ASF > >>>> header are that way because they use a different license and are > >>>> indeed correct. > >>> perhaps that's the point: use RAT to detect those with different > >>> licenses > >> Yes, the initial idea would be to do a reporting run, this would > >> indicate the number of files under a non-Apache licence. Those that are > >> OK would need to be added to an exclude list. > >> > >> Then do a re-licence run in which those not in the exclude list are > >> re-licenced. > >> > >>>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Ross Gardler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> Is it within the scope of RAT to optionally add licence headers > >>>>> automatically to documents that don't yet have them? > >>>>> > >>>>> If so, I may implement such a feature at some point in the near future > >>>>> using the relicensing scripts, available here in the ASF, as a starting > >>>>> point. > >>> possibly: but feel free to start here > >> OK, well I have about 2000 files that need relicensing and a little > >> "play time", so rather than just run the scripts against the code I'll > >> have a bash at bringing the functionality into RAT as described above. > > > > all sounds great :-) > > > > patch ATA...? > > this will be forthcoming. I'll move it over to the new package > structure. Might not get time for a week or so though, it's a bit busy > rounf here next week.
great - robert
