flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carol Frampton <cfram...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [MENTOR] release package questions
Date Fri, 23 Mar 2012 14:01:13 GMT

On 3/23/12 5 :38AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" <bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:

>Hi Carol,
>On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Carol Frampton <cframpto@adobe.com>
>> ...I read that every ASF release must contain a source package, which
>>must be sufficient for a
>> user to build and test the release provided they have access to the
>>appropriate platform and tools
>> and that Apache allows a binary package as a convenience to users that
>>may not want to build the sources....
>That's correct, only the source releases are official releases,
>binaries are just a convenience.
>> ... *   Is there suppose to be one package with just source and another
>>package with the results of the build or can they be combined?...
>A source-only package is required, that's what the (P)PMC votes on.
>If a binary package is distributed as well, it can contain the sources
>as a convenience but that won't be the official release so it's
>probably better to avoid that.
>> ...Our build downloads some libraries which don't have compatible
>>licenses to the Apache license.
>> Can we distribute binaries built with these libraries?...
>No, we can only distribute code with dependencies that are ok
>according to http://apache.org/legal/resolved.html.
>If the Flex code has dependencies with incompatible licenses, those
>must be optional, and users must be warned if the build downloads them

I just found and read http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html but I am
going to need some help figuring this all out.

We have a list of third-party libraries.  As far as I can tell the last
two in the list might be okay but the rest are not.
The only ones that might be able to be considered as add-on/optional are
OSMF and swfobject.  All the others are "system requirements" in Apache
terms and required to build anything in Flex.

playerglobal.swc - Adobe - this is Flash
airglobal.swc - Adobe - this is AIR
OSMF (Open Source Media Framework) - Adobe opensource
TLF (Text Layout Format) - Adobe opensource
javacc (Sun) - parser generator used by the compiler

saxon (MPL which might be reciprocal license)
swfobject (MIT which might be authorized license)

The build currently downloads each of these from external sites and uses
them.  There is not any notification from the build scripts that this is
being done.

It seems like, even if we get the build straightened out, we will not be
able to distribute a binary package.

How do you suggest I proceed?


>The rationale is that our releases must not put an additional burden
>on users besides the Apache Licenses - anything that introduces
>restrictions compared to that must be optional and clearly labelled as

View raw message