Re: checklicenses.py

[Michael Mann <mmann78 () netscape net>]

So is the "checklicense tool" now the same between the Petri-Dish and the master buildbot?  Is that the reason the 
master buildbot now has to "pass" (otherwise all Petri-Dish runs will fail)?
 
If so, I prefer the way it used to be - master buildbot (legitimately) failing, but Petri-Dish being more lenient (even 
if it was unintentional).  The intent of the original email and my efforts was to only remove errors for files that had 
a legitimate reason not to have license template.  I think "all files without an extension" is a little too generous an 
exception (although I do appreciate all the work João did) .  Guy nicely outlined the remaining issues and I don't want 
those to get lost in the shuffle because the buildbot appears as if its "passing".


 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: João Valverde <joao.valverde () tecnico ulisboa pt>
To: Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Sent: Sat, Aug 6, 2016 5:43 pm
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] checklicenses.py

On 08/06/2016 10:07 PM, Guy Harris wrote:> On Aug 6, 2016, at 1:21 PM, João Valverde <joao.valverde () tecnico ulisboa 
pt> wrote:>>> Done in https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/16913/.>> Does "Removed regex to check files without an 
extension." mean that we are, or aren't, checking files without an extension?>> If it means we aren't, should we give 
the few scripts that don't have an extension an extension, such as .sh for shell scripts, so that we check them for a 
license?  Most of our shell scripts have a .sh extension, although that's not necessarily the right answer for shell 
scripts to be run as commands.It means we aren't checking files without an extension. I removed that match from the 
Debian script as unworkable for our purposes, made worse by the fact that the check licenses step is being run on an 
unclean build directory by PD.I think your suggestion to add an .sh extension for files we wish to include would be 
best. But otherwise we should feel free to tailor checklicenses.py + licensecheck.pl in the tools dir to suit our 
needs.For future reference here is the diff I applied to the upstream licensecheck.pl:--- ../licensecheck.pl 2016-08-05 
20:43:04.098683796 +0100+++ tools/licensecheck.pl    2016-08-06 20:18:20.415943059 +0100@@ -193,8 +193,6 @@ my 
$default_ignore_regex = qr!  my $default_check_regex =      qr!-    /[\w-]+$                      # executable scripts 
or README like file-    |      \.(                          # search for file suffix         c(c|pp|xx)?              # 
c and c++         |h(h|pp|xx)?              # header files for c and c++@@ -594,7 +592,7 @@ EOF  sub version {      
print <<"EOF";-This is $progname, from the Debian devscripts package, version ###VERSION###+This is $progname, from the 
Debian devscripts package, version 2.16.2  Copyright (C) 2007, 2008 by Adam D. Barratt <adam\@adam-barratt.org.uk>; 
based  on a script of the same name from the KDE SDK by <dfaure\@kde.org>.@@ -657,7 +655,7 @@ sub parselicense {       
$license = "GPL$gplver$extrainfo $license";      }-+      if ($licensetext =~ /is distributed under the terms of the 
GNU General Public License,/       and length $gplver) 
{___________________________________________________________________________Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list 
<wireshark-dev () wireshark org>Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-devUnsubscribe: 
https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark 
org?subject=unsubscribe

___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe