flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.1 - RC3
Date Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:36:11 GMT

On 6/17/14 10:10 AM, "Justin Mclean" <justin@classsoftware.com> wrote:

>> AFAICT, it is the Google font, not the Adobe Font.
>Sorry I don't know and hard to tell where it come from as there no other
>info in that directory. May be in the fonts metadata I guess? IMO All the
>more reason for stating it somewhere.
The Google copyright is in the TTF file.   Is that sufficient for you to
accept that these are Google fonts?

>> Specifically, what changes do you propose to the release package?
>Just add somthing like:
>The Open Sans fonts in <dir> are licensed under the Apache 2.0 license and
>copyright XXXX Google. See <google URL> for more info.
Add that to what file according to what quote from the LICENSE and NOTICE

>I guess an alternative would be putting some license text in that font
>directory but that sort of hides it.
>> What part of the AL says that a copyright must be included/acknowledged
>Redistribution section 4 part c
>  (c) You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works
>          that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and
>          attribution notices from the Source form of the Work,
>          excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of
>          the Derivative Works; and
I think this isn't a Derivative Work.  IMO, that passage refers to headers
when you change someone's source code or base code off of someone's code.

>The AL only refers to NOTICE file and not the LICENSE file. Remember
>reading there's some reason for that but would need to search for it.
Are you referring to their desire to not have a long list of copyrights in
the headers of every file and/or to only claim copyright on the collective
work?  Either way, I don't think it is relevant here.


View raw message