In my opinion the RAT trouble is merely technical - there are two plugins and one of the works, the other doesn't. That's a technicality to fix for next release, but I don't think it should block a release now. Just my 5c.
(I voted +1 earlier on). 2013/12/18 Henry Saputra <[email protected]> > Sorry for the tardiness but I was occupied the last few days. > > Looks like there are some issues with RAT results. > > I will try to get it review later tonight. Apologize about the delay. > > - Henry > > > On Wednesday, December 18, 2013, Ankit Kumar wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > Did not hear back anything on the vote thread. Any updates all, what are > > the next steps? > > > > Regards > > Ankit > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Ankit Kumar <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > Hi Kasper/Matt, > > > > > > I just downloaded the source jar from the staging repo and when I run > the > > > below command on the same source then build is successful. > > > > > > *mvn org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.8:check *(Build successful) > > > > > > BUT when I run the below > > > *mvn rat:check* (it fails with the below error for 2 licenses) > > > NOTE: The plugin used is not the apache rat plugin then but > > > rat-maven-plugin with version 1.0-alpha-3. > > > > > > [ERROR] Failed to execute goal > > > org.codehaus.mojo:rat-maven-plugin:1.0-alpha-3:check (default-cli) on > > > project MetaModel: Too many unapproved licenses: 2 -> [Help 1] > > > > > > I guess it might be that on your local machine it is picking the 2nd > > > rat-plugin. We use the apache-rat-plugin with artifact details as > below. > > > <groupId>org.apache.rat</groupId> > > > <artifactId>apache-rat-plugin</artifactId> > > > > > > > > > Can you try with the first command specifying exactly the plugin > > group-id, > > > artifact name, version and goal. > > > > > > Hope this help in getting more positive votes. > > > > > > Regards > > > Ankit > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Matt Franklin < > [email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > >> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Kasper Sørensen < > > >> [email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >> > On the other hand - if I run "mvn test" (or mvn install), then the > rat > > >> > plugin IS included in the build, and the configuration is picked up > > >> > correctly. On that basis I vote ... > > >> > > > >> > +1 > > >> > > > >> > With a request to make sure "mvn rat:check" will work independently, > > or > > >> at > > >> > least set it up to run in the "validate" phase so it can be done > > without > > >> > compiling and running unittests. > > >> > > > >> > > >> The biggest issue that I see is that there are java test sources that > do > > >> not have license headers. These are excluded in the rat config and > > should > > >> not be. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > 2013/12/13 Kasper Sørensen <[email protected]> > > >> > > > >> > > I see the same thing ... If I download > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachemetamodel-010/org/apache/metamodel/MetaModel/4.0.0-incubating/MetaModel-4.0.0-incubating-source-release.zipandrun > "mvn > > rat:check" it fails. > > >> > > > > >> > > Looking at the report it seems that the configuration of the rat > > >> plugin > > >> > is > > >> > > not picked up correctly. In our configuration we have a bunch of > > >> > <exclude> > > >> > > elements but the rat plugin fails while processing those exact > files > > >> that > > >> > > should have been excluded (for instance src/site/*, target/* files > > and > > >> > > more). > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > 2013/12/12 Ankit Kumar <[email protected]> > > >> > > > > >> > >> Hi Matt, > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Thanks for your quick feedback. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> I would like to share that the Rat check is done as part of the > mvn > > >> > >> release process. It is automatically called because the Apache > > parent > > >> > pom > > >> > >> has the check applied under a release profile. No one can > influence > > >> it. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> Attach I send you all the summarized rat report file for all > > modules > > >> as > > >> > >> was generated when I released the code on 2013-12-03. > > >> > >> NOTE: Since for each module it generates >
