Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Yes, well spotted. On 2024/01/29 22:35, Paul Rogers wrote: James, If the extra check is costly, you might also observe that all (most?) existing files have the proper header format. It is only new or changed files that must be checked. So, you can use Git to determine the change set on each PR

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

James, If the extra check is costly, you might also observe that all (most?) existing files have the proper header format. It is only new or changed files that must be checked. So, you can use Git to determine the change set on each PR and do the extra format check only on those files. - Paul On

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Thank you for these explanations Claude. Looking at your second paragraph about the proposal to enhance the code that inserts headers, a comment start definition for Java files of '/*\n' (newline after the '/*') should work to accept the Apache license header in a Java comment but reject it if

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

James, The in general processing for matching licenses strips out all non essential text (e.g. '/' and '*') so the current implementation can not determine if the license text is within a javadoc block or not. Some matchers (e.g. Copyright, SPDX, and regex) do use the unmodified text but they are

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

The right way to get a copyright on every page is to tweak the javadoc command to use a different template (I would think). On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 12:00 AM Paul Rogers wrote: > Hi James, > > For some reason, Drill started with the license headers in Javadoc > comments. The (weak) explanation

Fwd: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Just a forward to complete the records. Forwarded Message Subject:Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 15:38:29 +0200 From: James Turton To: P. Ottlinger , d...@creadur.apache.org CC: dev Thanks Phil. Here's

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Thanks Paul I don't know how to configure the license plugin. But, I do suspect a Python file (or shell script) could make a one-time pass over the files to standardize headers into whatever format the team chooses. Only the first line of each file would change. I put more information in my reply

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Thanks Phil. Here's some background [1] which comes from before I was involved with Drill. What they wanted was for the license header checker to accept, in .java files, /* * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Hi James, thanks for reaching out! Am 26.01.24 um 08:21 schrieb James Turton: I'd like to ask about a feature to prevent RAT from allowing license headers to appear inside Javadoc comments  (/**) while still requiring them in Java comments (/*) in .java files. Currently the Drill project make

Re: License headers inside Javadoc comments

Hi James, For some reason, Drill started with the license headers in Javadoc comments. The (weak) explanation I got was that we never generate Javadoc, so it didn't really matter. Later, we started converting the headers to regular comments when convenient. If we were to generate Javadoc, having

License headers inside Javadoc comments

Good morning! I'd like to ask about a feature to prevent RAT from allowing license headers to appear inside Javadoc comments  (/**) while still requiring them in Java comments (/*) in .java files. Currently the Drill project makes use of com.mycila.license-maven-plugin to reject licenses in J