Yes, looks ok to me. Thanks for making the changes.
-Alex On 1/4/18, 4:05 PM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Hi Alex, > >this one is MIT: >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fundraw.co >%2Fillustrations&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4a238a32d3a24acc923b0 >8d553d01f7d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63650707569897950 >0&sdata=Nr4xo4hIfMGpwSlXX8j82aWqIS8X0tGD9tAIVn4O0fM%3D&reserved=0 > >so I think this ok for us right? > > > >2018-01-05 1:01 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]>: > >> Hi Alex, >> >> I'll see other options. In fact that part of the home was done only as >> something temporal and I want to replace for other material >> >> 2018-01-04 18:46 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: >> >>> Carlos, >>> >>> Even if we "can" use ET-Line on the website, can we replace it now with >>> something ALv2 compatible? That way we won't have to revisit this >>>topic >>> later, and I can make my mockup look more like your site, which might >>>help >>> me continue to keep working on Royale full-time. >>> >>> Please? >>> -Alex >>> >>> On 1/4/18, 8:14 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos >>>Rovira" >>> <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >Hi Justin, >>> > >>> >as stated by apache legal in the ticket where we discussed the >>>website, >>> is >>> >perfectly legal, since our website is only a marketing tool and no >>> >something that users will download as part of Apache Royale technology >>> >that >>> >we build. >>> > >>> >In case we want to make a website build with royale and provide the >>>code, >>> >I >>> >think we should not use it since in that case the website will be >>>part of >>> >the code we deliver. But that's not the case at least in the next >>>several >>> >months or years. >>> > >>> >Thanks >>> > >>> >Carlos >>> > >>> >2018-01-04 13:59 GMT+01:00 Justin Mclean <[email protected]>: >>> > >>> >> >>> >> But the ET lines font used in the site [1] is not from Google Fonts >>>and >>> >> under a GPL license (AFAICS). Can we use that in a offical Apache >>>TLP >>> >>web >>> >> site? I’m not sure and IMO it would be best to ask on legal discuss >>>to >>> >>see >>> >> if it’s OK OR select another icon font that is compatible with ALv2. >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Carlos Rovira >>> >> >>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http% >>> 3A%2F%2Fabout.me% >>> >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ccb76299 >>> 385a14b989b3208 >>> >>d5538e52ae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63 >>> 650679309204496 >>> >>6&sdata=BylxbJRt5WKFmo6GNzwrJMhm6YD%2BpBzVfbohnq8qzOg%3D&reserved=0 >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Carlos Rovira >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me% >>2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4a238a32d3a24acc923b08 >>d553d01f7d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63650707569897950 >>0&sdata=erKQBvdjH5PcLJXtHuaGHgVjAh3njM3gqeRw2klTK0o%3D&reserved=0 >> >> > > >-- >Carlos Rovira >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2 >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4a238a32d3a24acc923b08d5 >53d01f7d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636507075698979500&s >data=erKQBvdjH5PcLJXtHuaGHgVjAh3njM3gqeRw2klTK0o%3D&reserved=0
