Add a simple headerEndYear key for configuring year ranges in license headers
#282
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
A lot of the code is added in such a way that preserves both source and binary compatibility of builds. |
|
Nice contribution! Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We're big fans of
sbt-headerinsbt-typeleveland would like to upstream this change that we use in our projects. It is a simple scheme for specifying an optionalheaderEndYear. The range resolution is done in a very simplistic way, but it goes very far in our projects.Namely,
headerEndYearisNoneby default, but if provided and is greater than thestartYear, a range of the following format is constructed:results in
2021-2022as the year range, which is then inserted into the license header as the year. In any other case, theheaderEndYearis simply ignored.Opening this PR to jumpstart a discussion. I'm of course open to making this scheme more general and I'm looking forward to proposed improvements.
Thanks in advance.