Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of aharui@adobe.com designates
 64.18.1.183 as permitted sender)
From: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" <flex-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:00:43 -0700
Subject: Re: [MENTORS] Handling Adobe Binaries
Thread-Topic: [MENTORS] Handling Adobe Binaries
Thread-Index: Ac0j4YV5kms4GfAJTfO9ZGU6tWMRtwABb1nn
Message-ID: <CBBEF77B.3F9AB%aharui@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: <680D59681CD7427F9B5589873069E4A7@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/13.11.0.110726
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0


On 4/26/12 12:19 PM, "Rick Winscot" <rick.winscot@gmail.com> wrote:

> ( I'm speaking to Apache Flex in general - excluding Adobe or its employe=
es )
>=20
> At this point in time, Apache Flex has a direct dependency on playergloba=
l.swc
> as well as other bits and bobs... all of which provide interoperability (
> which was promised ) with Flash Player. Any kind of 'Iron Fist' or cease =
and
> desist would be difficult to dismiss as not being discriminative,
> anti-competitive, and a direct attempt to undermine our efforts ( just sa=
yin'
> ).
>=20
> 'How' this detail was missed is inconsequential... and we are all gainful=
ly
> engaged in trying to find a solution - which is good... but it might be b=
etter
> ( I might be going out on a limb here ) if we place the burden on Adobe.
The burden is already on Adobe.  We're working on it.  I'm not worried yet.

--=20
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui