flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Apache Flex TourDeFlex 1.0
Date Mon, 25 Aug 2014 23:45:12 GMT

On 8/25/14 4:19 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>> On 8/25/14 3:57 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> AIUI, as long as we can build TDF by downloading third-party SWCs as
>> >>part
>> >> of the build process it doesn't even have to be compatibly-licensed.
>> >
>> >
>> >That is, assuming that a 3rd party component developer has a freely
>> >available download that we could use.  It is not a very likely
>> Maybe we need concrete examples.  If your component isn't freely
>> available, maybe the app that exhibits it should be in the showcase?
>Do you mean 'should not'?
I meant "should".  If you won't disclose the source code, that app is a
better fit for the showcase than the explorer with its source views.
>> Or are you talking about components that aren't free?  Good question if
>> for-pay components are a good fit for Apache TDF.
>We need to support free and non-free component developers.  Otherwise we
>will never see enterprise components in the wild.  That is one of the
>reasons we don't have a good public showcase in spite of great apps being
>built on top of Apache Flex.
Apache has been conservative about looking like it is promoting
for-profits so we have to be careful, but if nobody else objects I'm fine
with it.
>> And, if we get clearance from the Incubator to make changes to our
>> of TDF on our site, then we could add them to the site version but not
>> Apache version.
>Please elaborate.  I am not sure what the difference is.
Well, we may not want explorer.xml in the git repo to list these
third-party examples, but the one on the site (or compiled into the one on
the site) could.

>Finally, why can't we just hotlink if the 3rd party folks are okay with
Can do that too, but then there is increased risk of failure of that
external url stops working.


View raw message