On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

them in ACCUMULO-2534 when rat-plugin complained. I believe the assumption
is that README files are generally minimal, but I do not want to speak for
the developers in this case.

I strongly believe that our README needs a licence header. I am under the
impression that it never had one.

It makes sense for rat-plugin to ignore binary files because they could be
encrypted or compressed or something else, and already have a license
header (false positives) or are simply impossible to add a header to
because they are machine generated.

If these files have licence headers somewhere in them, then I will withdraw
my concern over them. I felt that I performed due diligence by visually
inspecting them, running them through "strings" program, and attempting to
check for file metadata. I support removing them and somehow moving the
contents to our website.

 
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB