incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Om <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Test Release of Apache Flex 4.9
Date Wed, 12 Dec 2012 01:26:24 GMT
I kind of like this idea.  But is this something folks want to do?

Should we take a poll on this?

On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Hans | dotdotcommadot <
hans@dotdotcommadot.com> wrote:

> In my opinion we should be able to download all SDK's from the installer.
>
> And to be completely independent from adobe stuff, we should be able to
> get the entire SDK a full "apache" library, even in 2 years from now.
> So i would go for the 4.8.1 release with embeddded TLF, no?
> A clean solution that will last a while.
>
>
> On 11 Dec 2012, at 23:42, Om <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> As previously external components (ex. TLF) become internal to Apache
> >>> Flex, it is going to be quite hairy to get the licenses workflow going.
> >>> Any thoughts on this?
> >>
> >> TLF now doesn't require you to accept an license it's part of the Flex
> >> SDK/licensed under Apache.
> > Exactly my point.  Should Installer v.2 support both Flex 4.8 and 4.9 or
> > just 4.9?
> > If we want to support both in the same installer app, then it means
> quite a
> > bit of work to ensure that workflows are supported (one with external
> > loading of TLF, one without).
> >
> > Or do we want to create a 4.8.1 version with TLF baked into it?  Then
> there
> > is no need for external loading of TLF and we can do away with that piece
> > completely.
> >
> > I raised these issues earlier, but I guess it got buried somewhere.
> >
> >
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >> Justin
>

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