Billie, Ok understood. I'll update the release guide to indicate this guidance.
Thanks! Joe On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Billie Rinaldi <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it is okay to leave the rat exclusion as is. However, it is > important that you verify what has been committed as test resources, along > with anything else excluded from the rat check, before release. I'm sure > that no one will deliberately check in something they know shouldn't be > there, but people have a tendency to commit things to work around policies > they don't fully understand -- and understanding ASF policies is not a > trivial undertaking. This has happened on every project I've worked on. > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hello >> >> I've resolved all of the items raised in feedback for the 0.0.2 >> release excluding one item which will be discussed in a moment. All >> of the feedback and their disposition is captured in this JIRA >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-410 >> >> The only outstanding item is this feedback: >> >> "One thing I'd fix for the next release is the exclusion of test >> resources from the RAT check. Wouldn't it be better to do that by file >> extension (e.g., */.json, */.avro) to avoid not checking files that >> could have license headers?" >> >> I would like to leave it as we have it now. People should take care >> to apply the apache license header to everything including test data >> whenever possible. But we must also be considerate of the fact that >> test data is just that - test data. It is important that data under >> test mirrors exactly the data it is to be run against and certainly >> data we'd be processing in the wild will not often have license >> headers. Given this I don't see how we can keep the RAT exclusion >> list from turning into a mess. I prefer to trust that the developers >> are doing the right thing on test resources and keep the build simple. >> For non test resources though we retain a very specific and strict >> check. >> >> I'll close the ticket tracking the items raised for now but should >> folks have a strong view here then certainly we can address it. >> >> Thanks >> Joe >>
