Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Status and Outlook for Juno!

[David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> Could this be a bogus hit?

Absolutely not! :) 

Its just the last day is a rapidly changing
one! Ironic?

Virgo noted to this list already they'd
just fixed the features licenses and indeed the latest report is clean
for features: 
http://build.eclipse.org/juno/simrel/reporeports/reports/licenseConsistency.html

BUT
some regressions? (or new content?)
with problematic about.html files? 
http://build.eclipse.org/juno/simrel/reporeports/reports/layoutCheck.txt

P.S. 
The test/reports might always have quirks or bogus hits,
so I don't mind at all if people think they've found one to open bugs,
etc. 





From:      
 Wayne Beaton <wayne@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx,

Date:      
 06/13/2012 01:14 PM
Subject:    
   Re: [cross-project-issues-dev]
Status and Outlook for Juno!
Sent by:    
   cross-project-issues-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Thanks for the summary, John.

On 06/13/2012 09:45 AM, John Arthorne wrote: 
2) 10 features with no license (in particular their license
is the string "%license"). 1 from Virgo, 9 from Gemini. The most
common cause of this is missing key in feature.properties file, or the
feature.properties file itself is not included in the bin.includes list
in the feature's build.properties file. 
I took a quick look at a couple of the Virgo features
and the Gemini Web feature, and they seem to be okay with regard to licenses.
The feature.properties file is included, it has the "license"
key (the build file is also correct). AFAICT there hasn't been a recent
update the feature files. Could this be a bogus hit?

The Gemini Web feature appears to have been removed anyway...

Wayne
-- 
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse
Projects_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev