I guess we see it differently. The two answers we got seemed to conflict. I've asked for clarification on legal-discuss.
On 8/31/14 9:35 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: >Hi, > >> My understanding of the legal-discuss thread is that we cannot. > >My understanding is that we can. > >Given other projects have done similar things with Hunspell lets move >forward with the release and if and when Legal come back with a clear >decision we can (if required) fix any issues they identify. We are not >including any LGPL code or are we forcing users to download LGPL code. > >> We have to bundle the code in some other release like the Flex SDK >>where it >> Squiggly's capabilities can be seen as an optional feature. > >Squiggky is an optional feature and we can release it on it own. I see no >need to complicate matters and package it in the SDK and in fact that may >cause other (legal and otherwise) issues. > >Thanks, >Justin
