On 6/20/14 4:45 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>HI,
>
>> Correct. I know you are busy but I hoped you would carefully read the
>> entire quote.
>I did - see my email.
OK, well you confused me by quoting a passage that had no bearing on the
discussion.
>
>> And I believe that is the reason to inclu
On 6/20/14 4:30 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> If the media comes from a third-party source (not contributed directly
>>to
>> the project), then any copyright notice that is obviously associated
>>with
>> the media should be copied into the NOTICE file."
>
>This is the case however it is
HI,
> Correct. I know you are busy but I hoped you would carefully read the
> entire quote.
I did - see my email.
> And I believe that is the reason to include in NOTICE
Again I don't believe this to be the case. You may want to read 4 (d) of the
AL for the consequences of adding stuff to the
Hi,
> If the media comes from a third-party source (not contributed directly to
> the project), then any copyright notice that is obviously associated with
> the media should be copied into the NOTICE file."
This is the case however it is a permissive licence so should not go in the
NOTICE file.
On 6/20/14 4:21 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> If the media was contributed directly to an ASF project
>This is not the case.
Correct. I know you are busy but I hoped you would carefully read the
entire quote. The second half says:
"If the media comes from a third-party source (not con
The next line Alex quoted says:
If the media comes from a third-party source (not contributed directly to
> the project), then any copyright notice that is obviously associated with
> the media should be copied into the NOTICE file.
>
The copyright notice needs to be added to the NOTICE, right?
Hi,
> If the media was contributed directly to an ASF project
This is not the case.
Justin
OK. I could not reproduce Piotr's issue, but I can see one way he might
have gotten into that trap, so I am adding a null check for that and
Google copyright to NOTICE and creating RC4. Votes will carry over.
-Alex
On 6/20/14 11:12 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:
On 6/20/14 8:53 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" wrote:
>> If this is all you can manage at this time, than you should go ahead.
>
>+1
>
>I also would prefer to be up on the latest gc tools.
Given the fact I have something working on older versions that might work
in China, I think I'm going to release
Hi Darkstone,
I have pushed all of these changes. They should be available by running
the release candidate of the Installer against the nightly builds. I have
also changed the FlexJS build to attempt to get all of its dependencies
from Maven except the Google Closure Library, which it bundles.
Thanks!
I checked it in and did a test install. Everything seems to work fine. Of
course, more testing would be nice.
Thanks,
Om
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 11:41 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Looks ok to me.
>
> On 6/20/14 11:35 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>
> >Can someone please review this b
Looks ok to me.
On 6/20/14 11:35 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>Can someone please review this before I check it in?
>
>I am planning on making this change:
>
>Index: sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml
>===
>--- sdk-installer-config-4.
Can someone please review this before I check it in?
I am planning on making this change:
Index: sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml
===
--- sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml(revision 1604219)
+++ sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml(working cop
On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > As I said earlier, this issue was resolved during the Incubation release
> of
> > the Installer. I would say we are good with things as it is.
>
> I disagree - we are not abiding by the terms of their license and it's
> difficult
I will repeat the statements I made earlier.
The proposal is to put the Google Copyright, not a License of any sort, in
the NOTICE file based on this excerpt from this link:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
"Do images or other media require a copyright line in the NOTICE file?If
the me
Hi,
> OK, will look into it. While we're on the subject of the installer, does
> anybody have any more input on putting the Google Copyright in the NOTICE
> (not LICENSE)?
Why NOTICE? Everything I've read says that compatible licences do not go in
NOTCE. NOTICE is a lot stronger than LICENSE an
Hi,
> As I said earlier, this issue was resolved during the Incubation release of
> the Installer. I would say we are good with things as it is.
I disagree - we are not abiding by the terms of their license and it's
difficult to a user or reviewer to know where those files come from without
sp
The nightly builds should be deleting the "in" folder when the install
completes. We keep it around for the source package as it holds the
downloaded dependencies.
On 6/20/14 4:06 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" wrote:
>It's possible, I believe the ant scripts would have to be updated. It
>does get u
On Jun 20, 2014 6:48 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
> OK, will look into it. While we're on the subject of the installer, does
> anybody have any more input on putting the Google Copyright in the NOTICE
> (not LICENSE)?
As I said earlier, this issue was resolved during the Incubation release of
the I
> If this is all you can manage at this time, than you should go ahead.
+1
I also would prefer to be up on the latest gc tools.
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:e...@ixsoftware.nl]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 11:12 AM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: [FlexJS] Bu
Yeah, I agree that at some point we want to move forward to latest GCC and
GCL, but I think we need to get a release out now and worry about it later.
It isn't just a Java 7 dependency. We are already locking to a Java 7
version in FlexJS/FalconJX 0.0.1. The issues appear to be that GCC and
GCL
I am thoroughly against knowingly locking FlexJS to older versions of the
GC tools. I'm aware of the issues that currently block the implementation
of the most recent GCC and GCL, but these will only become worse when we
get further behind. My main concern about that is that at some point the
older
Hi Folks, This is mostly directed at the PMC members:
As you've seen Darkstone has been translating the installer strings to
Chinese. The current FlexJS release cannot be installed in China because
some google sites are blocked over there. Last night I found the Google
Closure Compiler binaries
OK, will look into it. While we're on the subject of the installer, does
anybody have any more input on putting the Google Copyright in the NOTICE
(not LICENSE)?
-Alex
On 6/20/14 1:12 AM, "piotrz" wrote:
>Hi Alex,
>
>Just tried to install FlexJS Nightly and got Installation Aborted.
>
>http://
It's possible, I believe the ant scripts would have to be updated. It does get
used using the build files.
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Tom Chiverton [mailto:t...@extravision.com]
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2014 5:58 AM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: Using Apache Flex installer with
On 20/06/14 10:53, Kessler CTR Mark J wrote:
BTW, what's the folder "in" for? It contains the AIR SDK again. Is it just
>a temp folder I can delete or is that really used somewhere? If it's a temp
>folder, why not just use the folder named "temp" instead of creating
>another one?
The "in" folder
Hi Alex,
Just tried to install FlexJS Nightly and got Installation Aborted.
http://images.devs-on.net/Image/XT26TCGDd5R3DLyH-Obszar.png
Additionally weird thing has happened when I tried to Copy Log it doesn't
work. Every time when I click "Copy Log" it is add block of text with
information bel
27 matches
Mail list logo
