Canceling because of the font licenses. The next RC will try to make them an option in the installer (and not bundled in the packages). Hold on to your hat!
-Alex On 3/29/16, 12:22 AM, "Justin Mclean" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >Sorry -1 binding due to possible license issues and unable to compile >from source. Willing to change vote to +1 if these are sorted. > >I checked: >- Signatures and hashes good >- Source NOTICE is OK >- Source LICENSE has some minor issues (see below) >- Binary NOTICE is OK >- Binary LICENSE same mine issues as source and missing Flat UI font >licenses >- Docs LICENSE file is incorrect as it list things it doesn’t contain >- Docs NOTICE is OK >- Docs NOTICE and LICENSE good >- All source files have Apache headers >- Unable to compile from source not sure what the issue is - may be Java >version related > >I see a lot of projects using sha rather than md5 these days, md5 is >considered not as secure as it once was. We may want to consider this for >future releases. > >Source LICENSE refers to frameworks/projects/Flat/as/defaults.css this >files doesn’t exist I assume it is >frameworks/projects/Flat/src/main/resources/defaults.css instead? > >Source LICENSE refers to examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.js >this file doesn't exist I assume it is >examples/native/USStatesMap/src/MapCoords.as instead? (note different >extension) > >In the binary it’s a little unclear how the the flat ui font files are >licensed (flat-ui-icons-regular.eot, flat-ui-icons-regular.swf, >flat-ui-icons-regular.ttf, flat-ui-icons-regular.woff, >lat-ui-icons-regular.svg), it look like they may be under a non >commercial CC license. > >The AS docs LICENSE looks to be incorrect as it’s a copy of source one >and list things not contained in the package. > >Thanks, >Justin > >
