Sword Dragon created FLEX-35255:
-----------------------------------
Summary: Discrepancy between FAQ and license terms
Key: FLEX-35255
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-35255
Project: Apache Flex
Issue Type: Documentation
Affects Versions: Apache Flex 4.15.0
Reporter: Sword Dragon
At http://flex.apache.org/dev-faq.html at the entry "Does Apache Flex cost
money?" stands the sentence "This allows you to use the SDK and any outputs of
the SDK for personal and commercial use with virtually no restrictions.". On
evaluating this I believe this allows me to compile SWF's with static linking
against components of the SDK (like the RSL's) without restrictions. But on
making a look at the actual license I believe the above case would create a
derivative work and the restrictions of point 4 of the Apache license version
2.0 would apply.
Am I eventually missing/overlooking something? What is the actual intention in
case of licensing terms for these statically integrated parts of the SWF? Is
eventually a linking exception needed?
Also I'm wondering if -static-link-runtime-shared-libraries=false would be
enough to solve a potential license issue or if there are still other
components that would still be statically integrated into the SWF that may
cause potential license issues. Also on dynamic linking with Apache Flex 4.15.0
the produced SWF seems to not work anymore. I'm not sure why, maybe the RSL's
are just not available online for this version and I should just create another
ticket for it (eventually I have just to downgrade to Adobe Flex 4.6 and
compile dynamically to gain more safety?).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
