flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject AW: Current FlexJS license/notice issues
Date Thu, 06 Oct 2016 07:14:37 GMT
So how about him approaching as "Justin who is member of the Flex PMC" asking him as an individual
to please do XYZ?

It would state that it's not the PMC asking, but would lay a little more weight on his appeal?


Von: Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2016 07:58:32
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

I would also prefer that Justin contact them as an individual. I think it’s less confrontational.
I see no reason to do so as “an official representative of the PMC”. I see no benefit
in doing so.

On Oct 4, 2016, at 10:21 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> Are other PMC members ok with approaching the upstreams as a PMC?  Do
> other PMC members prefer to use "trust" and "intent" and not bother 3rd
> parties on these details?   Maybe I'm in the minority these days.  It
> would certainly end the debate if the upstreams added headers, but I don't
> know if we want our project to have the reputation for being the stickler
> for these details.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message