+1 from me as well. Let me know if you plan to make this change for 1.1.1. Otherwise I'll continue working on getting that out.
From: Nicholas Gallardo <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 06/14/2010 01:23 PM Subject: Re: switch from Google license header plugin to RAT? +1 I remember the earlier discussion about RAT. ----- Original Message ---- From: Mike Rheinheimer <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Mon, June 14, 2010 12:59:42 PM Subject: switch from Google license header plugin to RAT? Hi, there was a request during the last release process on the PMC list to remove the header checking during regular maven builds of Wink. It was cluttering up the output, and the suggestion was to do it only in the CIBuild profile. I'm ok with this change, however, it introduces the opportunity to push code or changes that don't have license headers. My workflow does not typically involve doing a CIBuild. I could very easily see myself accidentally committing something that lacks the header, which would be caught later during a Hudson build. Regardless, in the interest of satisfying PMCs, cleaning up our build output, and making the build (marginally) faster, is everyone ok with this change? In addition, we are currently using a Google maven plugin to do this license header check: <plugin> <groupId>com.google.code.maven-license-plugin</groupId> <artifactId>maven-license-plugin</artifactId> ... The current trend is to move toward using ARAT (or RAT) project to do this: http://incubator.apache.org/rat/. This will supposedly perform the same checks that the maven-licence-plugin did, with the added benefit of adding the header if we forget. The good news there is that this clears up the potential problem of only doing licence header checks in the CIBuild profile I mentioned above. I'll test RAT to make sure it's doing what we want, and post a Jira with patch for your review. Everyone ok with this? Thanks. mike
