On Dec 12, 2007, at 1:08 PM, Jim Hurley wrote:
Hi Mark- On Dec 12, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Mark Brouwer wrote:: I believe before proposing to Incubator we are supposed to run RAT(Release Audit Tool) against the release, http://code.google.com/p/ arat/I'm sure it's great for us to run... but is it a requirement? I didn't see it in:<http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html>
This section of the referenced document is relevant: Check copyright notices: Licenses missing from source files Source files with other licenses which are not mentioned in LICENSE Check current policy on headers that all complyIt's not a requirement to run RAT, but it is a requirement to document the license for each piece of code that Apache distributes. Running RAT is an alternative to the release manager going through the entire release, file by file, and making sure that each file is properly attributed.
So RAT is actually intended to save huge amounts of time compared to the alternative.
Where did you see it? Thanks.As it were others who wanted to have this particular release I think others should also feel compelled to run the RAT ;-)That doesn't seem like a particularly progressive line of thinking.
And it's not that hard to run RAT. A competent Java engineer should be able to install and run RAT on a release in under 10 minutes. I've timed myself. ;-)
Craig
-Jim
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
