On 03/05/2012 14:52, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > Hi ! > > /me Checking the release atm. So far, nothing blocking. I'm not > totally done but I have a few comments : > > - When you start a new vote, say so by adding a number in the subject > (like "[Vote] Apache Syncope...; Take 3"). It helps people to not get > lost...
You're right, even though I would hope this won't be the case for each vote in the future... :-) > - I still have some files with no license with running mvn rat:check : > core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.identityconnectors.common.logging > > core/src/test/resources/test.csv > > AFAICT, those two files have no reason to have a license, and I guess > that it's covered in the apache-rat-plugin configuration. Can you > confirm that the check should be done with mvn apache-rat:check ? In > any case, I won't vote -1 because of those two files, just want to be > sure. As reported in the email body, apache-rat:check should be run, not rat:check; the latter has no configuration in our project, while the former does. The reasons for preferring apache-rat over rat are: * apache-rat is included in Apache POM 10, not rat * rat is obsolete, as reported by http://mojo.codehaus.org/rat-maven-plugin/ Regards. -- Francesco Chicchiriccò Apache Cocoon PMC and Apache Syncope PPMC Member http://people.apache.org/~ilgrosso/
