John Vines 2013-04-09, 21:44
Christopher 2013-04-09, 22:34
John Vines 2013-04-10, 00:05
John Vines 2013-04-10, 17:23
Christopher 2013-04-10, 18:09
Unsure, I had rmed the whole directory, so I can't go back to it :/
Why not have a release/pre-commit profile which does the rat check instead
of having it hit every time?
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 2:09 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Both of those are addressed with the profile that is activated with
> -DskipLicenseCheck, so a dirty workspace will pass the check. The
> focus was on being pedantic for the clean checkout situation.
> We can add exceptions for those things that make a workspace dirty,
> but aren't packaged, for 1.5. However, in the future (>=1.6), I'd like
> to help make it easier to move away from the practice of dirtying the
> source directories to run Accumulo out of one's workspace.
> There is so much to maintain with all the svn:ignore properties set,
> the exceptions in the custom assembly descriptors and RPM/DEB
> profiles... it'd be better to allow running out of the target
> directory (which is already ignored by almost all Maven plugins), and
> use the default settings for packaging plugins wherever possible, than
> to worry about maintaining all these exceptions.
> Running out of the workspace can still be possible (out of the target
> directories, or a dedicated top-level workspace directory whose tree
> we ignore entirely), without all these exceptions to the rule.
> So, with that in mind, I only added exceptions to the apache-rat
> plugin configuration for things whose licenses are described elsewhere
> (js libs), or for things where it misinterprets the file as text
> instead of binary (splits, for testing), so that anything that was
> dirtying the workspace would explicitly be caught. As I said, it can
> be more lenient for 1.5 if you wish, but I think deactivating the
> check with the -DskipLicenseCheck should be sufficient for your needs.
> I'm still curious, however, why things would have gotten stuck for
> you... getting stuck is very different than failing due to license
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:23 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hmm, fresh checkout everything went fine. However, for sanity's sake I
> > ahead and I dropped my configurations into conf and stripped out all of
> > apache headers and I got a rat failure, too many unapproved licenses.It
> > shouldn't be checking those files since they aren't packaged.
> > It also appears to be checking my log directory, so that needs to be
> > addressed too.
> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 8:05 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I had taken out the rat plugin in order to get it to build
> successfully. I
> >> will try your tips tomorrow.
> >> Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity.
> >> On Apr 9, 2013 6:34 PM, "Christopher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> That message is the from the apache-rat plugin, but the apache-rat
> >>> plugin would fail the build at verify phase if there was a problem. It
> >>> wouldn't hang. You're going to have to provide more info, as it works
> >>> for me. Have you tried with a clean checkout? Does it work with
> >>> -DskipLicenseCheck? Does mvn package or mvn verify work?
> >>> --
> >>> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >>> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 5:44 PM, John Vines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> > Attempting to do a mvn install of 1.5 and it just hangs with the
> >>> > [INFO] No excludes
> >>> >
> >>> > This has something to do with rat, but I don't know what.
David Medinets 2013-04-11, 00:53
Christopher 2013-04-11, 02:56
Keith Turner 2013-04-11, 14:38
Christopher 2013-04-11, 16:44
Keith Turner 2013-04-11, 18:01
Christopher 2013-04-11, 18:05
Christopher 2013-04-11, 16:48