[Windmill-dev] windmill on ohloh.net prompts some cleanup

[Mikeal Rogers]

Someone talked me in to joining ohloh.net today, and since windmill  
wasn't a listed project on their yet I decided to go ahead and add it.

http://www.ohloh.net/projects/8990?p=windmill

A few things I noticed.

- One project I have was noted as having "Extremely well-commented  
source code". Windmill was not noted as having this.

Come on, this is a  test tool/framework, our in code documentation  
should be a LOT better.

- It says the project is 77% JavaScript and 22% Python.

I know that we have more lines of JavaScript than Python, but I think  
this ratio is exaggerated a bit by the fact that some of our  
JavaScript external dependencies are actually checked in to the  
windmill source tree. I could care less about what the ratios on  
ohloh say but this reminded me that we really do need to do something  
about js dependencies. The major one I know of is fleegix.js . We  
need to come up with a better way of managing this.

First, we need to stop running pre-release fleegix.js bits in the  
trunk and release code for windmill as a matter of policy. If you're  
working on a new feature that needs pre-release fleegix bits you can  
do it in a branch and merge in to trunk after a fleegix update gets  
rolled.

Second, anything we _can_ keep out of the windmill repo, we should.  
The last thing I want to do is create some build build process for  
windmill, it's python and javascript we should never have to "build"  
just to run windmill, but we can find a better way to manage these  
dependencies. I'm open to suggestions, the most obvious one to me is  
to pull in fleegix bits via an svn external definition to the tagged  
and released fleegix we're using. This makes changing the version  
very easy and explicit as well. People's local repositories will  
still have the fleegix bits in them ( and the ohloh ratio probably  
won't change because of that ) but it's much cleaner and easier for  
us to manage.

- Ohlo is showing a variety of licenses in different files. This  
prompted me to quickly audit the js directories copyright.

cssQuery by Dean Edwards is licensed LGPL -- What do we use this for?  
Is this something we can pull in externally and not keep in our repo?
fleegix.js doesn't have copyright, wtf?
htmlutils.js is copyright thoughtworks -- What do we use this for?
toolman.js is copyright but I can't tell which license?
xpath.js has a google license with no copyright info, can we even use  
this?
controller.js that still has the thoughtworks copyright info. Is any  
thougthworks (Selenium) code still in that??

I also notice a bunch of files without copyright, naughty naughty,  
This needs to get fixed before we can release 0.2. **Every** file  
needs to have OSAF copyright, that includes css, html, even empty  
files that may some day contain source -- just stick the copyright  
info in.

There are still a lot of files with OSAF Copyright 2006, this needs  
to get changed to OSAF Copyright 2006-2007.

Some of these copyright issues are very serious and we need to fix  
this before we release 0.2.

-Mikeal