Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
i think it's about time to think about releasing jsieve 0.2. i think
i've cleaned up the outstanding code issues now. the website needs
some more work and help would be appreciated. i have one outstandard
provenance issue but i hope that should be easy to resolve.
opinions?
+1
I'm running a few check/tests.
1) the ant build put some test file in the binary jar instead of the
junit jar:
org.apache.jsieve.util.check.*
org.apache.jsieve.javaxmail.*
the class SieveAddressBuilderTest
the class SieveParserVisitorImplQuoteTest
I found them by comparing m2 result with ant result (ant is a bit more
"manual" because I had to download 3 jars manually in order to build).
options:
a) ignore the issue
b) fix the ant build
c) use m2 as the official build tool [would only require a better
MANIFEST that I can fix, if needed]
2) Added the rat checks to the pom so I was able to run rat easily.
Everything is ok but I had to add this excludes:
<exclude>NOTICE.base</exclude>
<exclude>LICENSE.apache</exclude>
they are used by the ANT build to put "better" NOTICE/LICENSE in the
resulting jars.
<exclude>src/site/resources/rfc2234.txt</exclude>
<exclude>src/site/resources/rfc2244.txt</exclude>
<exclude>src/site/resources/rfc2298.txt</exclude>
<exclude>src/site/resources/rfc3028.txt</exclude>
They are rfc: do they need a license header?
<exclude>stage/oro/poms/oro-2.0.8.pom</exclude>
This is a very simple pom (the one automatically generated by maven for
the artifact) from an ASF project. It does not have a license header and
I guess we should include as is.
3) Removed the src/doc/rfc* files because we already have them in the
src/site/resources folder and they are not used by the ant build.
4) Removed the samples folder from the root: empty and not used?
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
