On 9/28/06, Leo Simons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sep 28, 2006, at 9:20 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
> I took the liberty of looking at the Struts 2 release, and they don't
> have license headers in the aforementioned files.
That's a Bad Thing(tm).
Tattletale! :)
Don
LSD
--
On Sep 28, 2006, at 9:20 PM, Martijn Dashorst wrote:
My question is, should all these [source] files get the ASL headers?
All source files should have appropriate headers. If its apache-owned,
ASL-licensed source, it should have the ASL header.
This would
be a hard hit for the embedded JavaSc
On 9/28/06, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 9/28/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Especially the apt format doesn't work
> together with comments.
comments work fine with xml and fml. i'm surprised that apt doesn't
allow comments. perhaps jason or brett migh
On 9/28/06, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I just ran the tool on the Wicket 1.2.2 distribution, just to see how
we stack up and how much we need to change our release.
I came up with some questions when I read report that came out of the
tool, and would like to see what the po
