On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Tom White <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> -1. RAT is failing for me, otherwise things look good (tests and such). >>> >>> $ mvn apache-rat:check >>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal >>> org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.6:check (default-cli) on project >>> whirr-cli: Too many unapproved licenses: 1 -> [Help 1] >> >> I just tried running RAT and got the same error, but it is for a whirr >> log file (cli/whirr.log), which is produced after running unit tests: >> When I remove this file then RAT passes, so it should be OK? We should >> probably have RAT ignore log files though. >> > > I see, in that case +1. I deleted that log file and rat passed. Why > aren't all the log files going into the 'target' directory? Perhaps > that would be a better way to resolve it.
I've created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WHIRR-217 to fix this in the next release. > >>> >>> also I notice that in the shaded cli jar meta-inf/dependencies and >>> meta-inf/notice seem to be out of date? >> >> These are generated automatically by the shading process. Which parts >> look out of date? > > Well the notice has some jars but not all of them, the dependencies > has a list of "unknowns", some of which have no license detail. This > is expected? (I did review everything listed there and they do seem to > be cat a/b licenses so it should be fine...) The dependencies and notice in the shaded jar are generated automatically which explains some gaps where the metadata (e.g. organization name) is not available in the original jars. These gaps are covered by the top-level NOTICE.txt and the licences in lib, which I have checked are all in category A or B. And each jar file in lib has an accompanying license, where this is required by the license. So I think everything should be covered here. Cheers, Tom > > Patrick >
