Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 12698DC8C for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:14:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 96022 invoked by uid 500); 11 Sep 2012 09:14:34 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95771 invoked by uid 500); 11 Sep 2012 09:14:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95746 invoked by uid 99); 11 Sep 2012 09:14:29 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:14:29 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-lb0-f175.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username bdelacretaz, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:14:29 +0000 Received: by lban1 with SMTP id n1so189343lba.6 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 02:14:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.47.100 with SMTP id c4mr2556036lbn.49.1347354867255; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 02:14:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.151.100 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Sep 2012 02:14:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:14:27 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [MENTOR] and PPMC members: info page about binaries From: Bertrand Delacretaz To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Erik de Bruin wrote: > ...That's > what the convenience binaries are for, IMHO. Having those available > from the Apache 'network' (which for all intends and purposes the > mirrors act like) will make most people trust them implicitly (yes, > not a good idea, agreed, but certainly the way it works for most). I'm > sure this is true for any network that makes the binaries available > (e.g. Spoon), but since the name is APACHE Flex... I feel the best > place for them is with Apache... I guess in the end the question is whether people will trust more a) The ASF who explicitly says "you're on your own if you use our binaries, get the source if you want the real thing" b) A well-known external entity like Spoon who says "we carefully build and test our Apache Flex binaries so that the Flex community can use them safely" The result is probably hard to predict ;-) -Bertrand