OK, makes sense, thanks for these insights and ideas. Gj
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@codeconsult.ch> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 2:35 PM, Geertjan Wielenga > <geertjan.wiele...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >>... >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/nbbuild/build.xml >> This is what line 2105 says: >> <exclude name="*/test/unit/data/**" /> <!--would cause tests to fail--> ... > > Maybe grouping those exclusions by families would make it easier for > reviewers to understand them: first the ones which are not creative, > then those where a header would cause tests to fail etc. > >> ...You're saying the comment isn't needed in the README... > > What I'm saying is that it shouldn't be duplicated - have the README > point to that build.xml file,or as discussed a file that just has RAT > exclusions, and add the comments next to the exclusions, pointing to > apache.org docs where useful. > >> ...can NETBEANS-306 be closed as resolved?... > > I suggest grouping the exclusions that fall in that family and adding > a pointer to the Apache docs that mention that the header is not > required if it causes tests to fail. > > You then get links from README -> commented RAT exclusions -> Apache > documentation which provide a clear justification. > > -Bertrand > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
