On 07/20/11 09:26, Stefan Bodewig wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to document the attribbutes of the new license matcher I > added to the Antlib yesterday, basically they are the same as those of > described in > <http://ci.apache.org/projects/rat/apache-rat-plugin/examples/custom-license.html> > > I wanted to show the impact of the attributes, i.e. where does which > value show up inside the report. So I dug into pieces of RAT's code > that I've never really visited before. > > So far I have > > * notes > > Ends up in a metadata attribute RAT_URL_HEADER_SAMPLE and becomes the > text content of the <header-sample/> element. > > Invisible inside the plain text report as header samples are only > emitted for unknown licenses. > > * licenseFamilyName > > Ends up in a metadata attribute RAT_URL_LICENSE_FAMILY_NAME and > becomes the name attribute of a <license-family/> element. > > This one is checked against the list of approved license names and > results in <license-approval name='false'/> (or true, depending on the > approved licenses, of course). > > * licenseFamilyCategory > > Ends up in a metadata attribute RAT_URL_HEADER_CATEGORY and becomes > the name attribute of the <header-type/> element. > > This is the only visual impact any of the attributes has on a plain > text report. It is shown next to the file name in the list of scanned > files. > > BUT it also ends up in a metadata attribute > RAT_URL_LICENSE_FAMILY_CATEGORY and becomes the name attribute of a > (second) <license-family/> Element. > > So we end up with two <license-family/> elements, one with the "short > name" and one with the longer one. Is this intentional? The plain text > report ignores those elements completely.
IIRC the original intent was to support license reasoning but I'd be very happy to see the reporting simplified by removing them Robert
