flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.1 - RC3
Date Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:07:24 GMT
Turns out this morning I heard from the hard-liner I was most concerned
about on legal-discuss.  To my surprise, he also recommended #2 and
supported changing the documentation.  So I've added the following to the
installer license:

The Open-Sans font is available under Apache License 2.0.  For details
see common/src/assets/fonts/open-sans/

The NativeApplicationUpdater is available under Apache License 2.0.
For details see installer/src/com/riaspace/

I now have to upgrade my AIR SDKs and then start working on Rcs.


-Alex

On 6/26/14 1:09 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <erik@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:

>I'd go with option 1, as I think Alex's arguments are based on the text
>and
>spirit of Apache's own documentation and legal advise, but since that
>would
>keep this endless (and as it turns out unnecessary) discussion alive, I
>suggest we go with option 2. Justin obviously won't give up on this, nor
>will he change his mind, not even when presented with what are to me
>pretty
>convincing arguments, so let's give him this "win" and move on.
>
>EdB
>
>
>
>On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> This crossed paths with my other reply.  I do not think we should go
>>with
>> #2, but if you and Justin feel this is the right thing to do, then
>>that's
>> what we'll do.  I'm out of time for tonight, but will start on prepping
>> Rcs with #2 tomorrow.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 6/25/14 11:32 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Alex, if you don't have an objection to #2, let's go with that?
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >Om
>> >On Jun 25, 2014 11:16 PM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 6/25/14 11:07 PM, "Justin Mclean" <justin@classsoftware.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> >+1 for 2 as :
>> >> >- that's easy to do
>> >> >- complies with legal requirements re acknowledging copyright (which
>> >>are
>> >> >in addition to the license terms in some locations)
>> >> I do not believe the legal-discuss folks agree that there is a legal
>> >> requirement, otherwise they would require us to change LICENSE and
>> >>NOTICE
>> >> which they have not.
>> >>
>> >> >- is in an obvious place for users to see
>> >> >- there is precedence in other projects
>> >> >
>> >> >Justin
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Ix Multimedia Software
>
>Jan Luykenstraat 27
>3521 VB Utrecht
>
>T. 06-51952295
>I. www.ixsoftware.nl


Mime
View raw message