Maybe. Not sure. What’s standard practice with this kind of thing? I’ve never done this before.
> On Jul 14, 2017, at 6:59 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Hi Harbs, > > If the package naming is kept is there any risk of a user having a classname > collision if they use the original GitHub project? > > Regards, > Dave > >> On Jul 14, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I contacted the other contributors. >> >> I already got permission from the one who did the critical fix. (forwarded >> to the dev list) That only leaves one more who did convenience code changes. >> We can remove that code if necessary. >> >> The document changes were not in the class file. It was to the readme in the >> repo. >> >> Question: I assume that we keep the same package naming if we include it on >> the repo unless it’s specifically donated to Apache. Correct? >> >> What about a modified class that I changed to work with FlexJS? Would that >> get an apache package path or not? >> >>> On Jul 14, 2017, at 6:18 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote: >>> >>> AIUI, we are supposed to try to contact all contributors, no matter how >>> small. If you don't hear from all of them, the PMC has to make a risk >>> assessment. If we take un-permitted lines of code and someone later >>> objects, could we quickly remove those lines of code and replace it? Or, >>> should our initial check-in not include un-permitted lines of code and the >>> first commits replace them? >>> >>> Of course, I could be wrong... >>> -Alex >>> >>> On 7/13/17, 2:40 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> One of them was documentation edits. >>>> >>>> Another was a workaround for a Flash permissions issue. It was a sometime >>>> yes, sometimes no problem. I finally found where the problem lay that >>>> required that code. You can see the comments in old issues on that repo. >>>> That piece of code is very necessary for Flash. There’s really only one >>>> way to solve that particular issue. Not sure if he can own that solution. >>>> >>>> The third was some convenience methods. Not a major contribution. >>>> >>>>> On Jul 14, 2017, at 12:07 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Made two comments in the GH issue. Looks like there were other >>>>> contributors so we may need to get their permission to make the license >>>>> ALv2. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, I could be wrong,... >>>>> -Alex >>>>> >>>>> On 7/12/17, 9:14 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I don’t think he has plans on modifying it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Do you mind making the suggestion about the header to the Github issue? >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 13, 2017, at 7:10 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IMO, if the original author will be helping make changes to this file, >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> want an ICLA. If he has no plans to work on it, then attaching it to >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> JIRA would be sufficient documentation of his intent to donate it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Either way, it would help if he put the 3rd-party ALv2 header in the >>>>>>> file. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -Alex >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/12/17, 8:59 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In our repo with my modifications for FlexJS. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Jul 13, 2017, at 1:22 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> What do you mean by "adopt". That the new home for further >>>>>>>>> improvements >>>>>>>>> is in our repo or that we're using it as a third-party dependency? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -Alex >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 7/12/17, 12:45 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There’s a great class for uploading multi-part HTTP requests. I’ve >>>>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>>>> using it for years, and I’ve ported it for use with FlexJS. It >>>>>>>>>> works >>>>>>>>>> great in that context too. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I just asked the author if he minds if we adopt it and he’s very >>>>>>>>>> happy >>>>>>>>>> for us to do so.[1] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> It’s one class. Do we need to go through an ICLA, or can we just >>>>>>>>>> bring >>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>>> in with no fuss? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>> Harbs >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> [1]https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2F >>>>>>>>>> gi >>>>>>>>>> th >>>>>>>>>> ub >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> .com%2Fjimojon%2FMultipart.as%2Fissues%2F9&data=02%7C01%7C%7C61a62bf >>>>>>>>>> 56 >>>>>>>>>> 17 >>>>>>>>>> 14 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 5e9929708d4c95e9650%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636 >>>>>>>>>> 35 >>>>>>>>>> 48 >>>>>>>>>> 55 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 465043104&sdata=2SKnAIfWKXwDacqORK3Td9AyYffkEXBYr%2BTPdtm6efo%3D&res >>>>>>>>>> er >>>>>>>>>> ve >>>>>>>>>> d= >>>>>>>>>> 0 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgi >>>>>>>>>> th >>>>>>>>>> ub >>>>>>>>>> .c >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> om%2Fjimojon%2FMultipart.as%2Fissues%2F9&data=02%7C01%7C%7C61a62bf56 >>>>>>>>>> 17 >>>>>>>>>> 14 >>>>>>>>>> 5e >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 9929708d4c95e9650%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63635 >>>>>>>>>> 48 >>>>>>>>>> 55 >>>>>>>>>> 46 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 5043104&sdata=2SKnAIfWKXwDacqORK3Td9AyYffkEXBYr%2BTPdtm6efo%3D&reser >>>>>>>>>> ve >>>>>>>>>> d= >>>>>>>>>> 0> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
