?
>
> Chris
>
>
> Von: Mihai Chira
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. September 2014 12:42
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
>
> I hope so. But from what I remember (and I wasn't the main devel
@Mihai: Are you testing the Mavenized version or simply the output of the
normal ANT build?
Chris
Von: Mihai Chira
Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. September 2014 12:42
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
I hope so
I hope so. But from what I remember (and I wasn't the main developer
dealing with this), the flex version of the project depended on
classes inside the non-flex version, which means that if the wrong
compiler argument was used, it would also replace the flex-SpellUI
with the non-flex-SpellUI. But a
Hi,
> Even if this is not a problem anymore, it might be worth adding a new
> step to the release verification process to create a project without
> Flex and make sure that squiggly works well, and the same for a Flex
> project.
I think this is just a matter of including the right swcs and not al
I wanted to add two things related to squiggly, in order of importance:
1. (Sorry if I'm stating the obvious:) There are two versions of the
class SpellUI.as - one of flex projects and one for projects which
don't include the Flex framework. We had a big problem when we tried
to compile the projec
Hi,
> Don't know if it is a blocker. I can ask legal. I'm just wondering if the
> current text properly indicates the permissive license for English.
I really don't think you need to ask legal again but if you really feel you
need to go ahead. We as a PMC should be able to decide, and in it's d
Don't know if it is a blocker. I can ask legal. I'm just wondering if the
current text properly indicates the permissive license for English.
Sent via the PANTECH Discover, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone.
Justin Mclean wrote:
Hi,
> The concern: The README points folks to openoffice.org and
> http
Hi,
> And ... when preparing the next RC ... if you could do a RELEASE run, we
> could stage our first Release as Maven artifacts too.
The current SNAPSHOP needs to be reviewed first.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
> The concern: The README points folks to openoffice.org and
> http://hunspell.sourceforge.net.
And in your view is this a blocker and requires another release candidate or
can we fix in the next release?
> 1) Are we sure it is ok to add the asdoc into the source package?
There is no requ
a test-run before I start adding maven
deployment stuff to the other sub-projects.
Chris
Von: Alex Harui
Gesendet: Montag, 1. September 2014 16:47
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
On 9/1/14 1:56 AM, &quo
On 9/1/14 1:56 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> My apologies for this going so long. Basically, all we need now is a
>> ruling from legal-discuss as to whether the license for Kevin Atkinson
>>is
>> considered BSD or MIT or otherwise Apache-compatible.
>
>And that now been confirmed by leg
Hi,
> My apologies for this going so long. Basically, all we need now is a
> ruling from legal-discuss as to whether the license for Kevin Atkinson is
> considered BSD or MIT or otherwise Apache-compatible.
And that now been confirmed by legal so all is good with the release candidate.
Unless a
My apologies for this going so long. Basically, all we need now is a
ruling from legal-discuss as to whether the license for Kevin Atkinson is
considered BSD or MIT or otherwise Apache-compatible.
Should be over as soon as we get the ruling.
-Alex
On 9/1/14 12:14 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>T
Hi,
> Apparently there are two (or more) interpretations possible.
Nope in this case it's quite clear cut. Either SCOWL contains a Category X
license or not.
Every single other objection that has raised has been sorted by the discussion
on legal and the current RC still complies with Apache li
It's all very confusing to me. It isn't my call. I have asked for a
ruling from legal-discuss. It is odd that other products like AOO haven't
switched to this dictionary.
Once they give us the green light, we'll be all set.
-Alex
On 9/1/14 12:04 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> To be s
This is another one for the (yet to be implemented)
legal-disc...@flex.apache.org mailing list :-(
Apparently there are two (or more) interpretations possible. Either agree
to disagree and toss a coin, or ask someone who can break the tie to take a
look, and move on, please.
EdB
On Mon, Sep 1,
Hi,
> To be safe, we should probably get a ruling from legal-dicuss on the SCOWL
> dictionaries.
No ruling is required, there are no incompatible licences, all dictionaries are
based on word lists in the public domian and/or licenses unencumbered by rights
that would be incompatable with Apach
On 8/31/14 11:14 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>So given that the two objections you just raised we already comply with
>(ie That not all dictionaries out there are Category X and we do know of
>an English dictionary with an Apache compatible license) can we move
>forward now?
To be safe, w
Hi,
So given that the two objections you just raised we already comply with (ie
That not all dictionaries out there are Category X and we do know of an English
dictionary with an Apache compatible license) can we move forward now?
Justin
Hi,
> "If you want just a spell-checker package, then that is fine. You just
> can't produce something that requires Category X (whether build or run
> time)."
And Squiggly doesn't require anything that is Category X. The dictionaries come
in many licences, it just seems most are LGPL.
This is
It still isn't clear to me. I asked for more clarification. Here are two
parts of the last reply on legal-discuss:
"If you want just a spell-checker package, then that is fine. You just
can't produce something that requires Category X (whether build or run
time)."
First he says we can have a pa
Hi,
So given the reply on legal would now agree we can release as a separate
package and we can move forward with the vote on the RC?
Thanks,
Justin
I guess we see it differently. The two answers we got seemed to conflict.
I've asked for clarification on legal-discuss.
On 8/31/14 9:35 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> My understanding of the legal-discuss thread is that we cannot.
>
>My understanding is that we can.
>
>Given other proj
Hi,
> My understanding of the legal-discuss thread is that we cannot.
My understanding is that we can.
Given other projects have done similar things with Hunspell lets move forward
with the release and if and when Legal come back with a clear decision we can
(if required) fix any issues they
I guess I don't understand. You think the PMC should vote to approve a
release that only contains Squiggly?
My understanding of the legal-discuss thread is that we cannot. We have
to bundle the code in some other release like the Flex SDK where it
Squiggly's capabilities can be seen as an option
Hi,
> The lucene link looks like it is doc for a java package of classes, not a
> separate file in the release artifact.
It generated from the source and is in the release.
> IMO, we can link to link AOO
Which is exactly what we are doing in the RC.
> Remember that the Flex SDK already has a c
The lucene link looks like it is doc for a java package of classes, not a
separate file in the release artifact.
IMO, we can link to link AOO or offer downloads in the ant
scripts/installer. I think the second key question is, does the code that
calls/uses the category X code/data need to be in a
Hi,
> Eventually it could utilize Flex' runtime loaded resource-bundles?
Not that I can see, the format, while text based, is very different.
Justin
Hi,
> I’m not sure if there’s any way to include languages that optionally download
> at runtime.
You specify the language via the SpellingConfig.xml files, that's loaded at
runtime then dictionaries specified in that file are loaded at runtime. So you
can have no dictionaries, user defined di
-
Von: Harbs [mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 31. August 2014 11:49
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
I've never used Squiggly, but I would like to - with one caveat.
I'm not sure if there's any way to include langu
gt;
> Chris
>
>
> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
> Von: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com]
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 31. August 2014 03:26
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
>
> Hi,
>
>> Glad t
dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
> Glad that it's now working :-)
Well making a snapshop and the snapshop and 100% working may be two different
things. Mind checking the contents for me?
> When running on the Apache Jenkins this aut
Hi,
Or even better this link:
https://lucene.apache.org/core/4_0_0/analyzers-common/org/apache/lucene/analysis/hunspell/package-summary.html
Justin
Hi,
> Lucerne does exactly what we are doing (as far as I can see).
Sorry wrong link - try this link instead:
https://code.google.com/p/lucene-hunspell/
Justin
Hi,
> What is preventing us from doing what Apache Open Office is doing here?
Basically they got special permission to bundle (L)GPL dictionaries, see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-117, but yes you right they also
link to them.
Lucerne does exactly what we are doing (as far as I
What is preventing us from doing what Apache Open Office is doing here?
http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/english-dictionaries-apache-openoffice
Thanks,
Om
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 11:52 PM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > We would have to bundle the source with the SDK and vote on
Hi,
> We would have to bundle the source with the SDK and vote on a new SDK release.
Wouldn't that also be in violation? And actually force the component to be non
optional, unless you count having it installed but not using it as non optional?
Justin
There's a key question to be answered on legal-discuss, which is whether
we are in violation of the guidelines by releasing a package that doesn't
bundle or download Category X and just telling folks where to get the
Category X data. Henri said Yes, Greg implied no (with the
runtime-dependency ans
Hi Alex,
Given legal advice currently is:
1. If I cannot run Apache Flex without acquiring that (L)GPL data, then it
violates the guidelines.
2. making it an optional feature is a great and perfectly acceptable solution
3. Flex's ActionScript spellchecker would not include the LGPL/GPL dictionari
Hi,
> Glad that it's now working :-)
Well making a snapshop and the snapshop and 100% working may be two different
things. Mind checking the contents for me?
> When running on the Apache Jenkins this automatically works.
Good to know, but making a release is still a manual process right via
h
ftware.com]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 31. August 2014 01:34
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
> ant -f maven.xml
Works for me now - thanks.
> Would start to deploy the SNAPSHOT artifacts to Apaches Snapshot repo.
I have given t
Hi,
> ant -f maven.xml
Works for me now - thanks.
> Would start to deploy the SNAPSHOT artifacts to Apaches Snapshot repo.
I have given that a try:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/snapshots/org/apache/flex/squiggly/
Want to confirm everything looks good in there?
Given you
are.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 30. August 2014 12:11
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
> That was exactly what I was looking for ... thanks :-)
I'm currently getting:
[INFO] Scanning for projects...
[ERROR] The build could not read 1 proje
On 8/30/14 1:51 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> From folks who have been in the ipmc longer and advise on whether this
>>is a category x dependency.
>
>Looks like the question has already been answered, and it probably legal
>rather than incubator who would need to answer if we think it is
Hi,
> That was exactly what I was looking for ... thanks :-)
I'm currently getting:
[INFO] Scanning for projects...
[ERROR] The build could not read 1 project -> [Help 1]
[ERROR]
[ERROR] The project
[unknown-group-id]:[unknown-artifact-id]:[unknown-version]
(/Users/justinmclean/Documents/A
Hi,
> From folks who have been in the ipmc longer and advise on whether this is a
> category x dependency.
Looks like the question has already been answered, and it probably legal rather
than incubator who would need to answer if we think it is an issue.
1. https://code.google.com/p/lucene-hun
>From folks who have been in the ipmc longer and advise on whether this is a
>category x dependency.
Sent via the PANTECH Discover, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone.
Justin Mclean wrote:
Hi,
> Do you think we need confirmation before proceeding?
Confirmation of exactly what and from who?
Justin
Hi,
> Do you think we need confirmation before proceeding?
Confirmation of exactly what and from who?
Justin
That was exactly what I was looking for ... thanks :-)
Von: Justin Mclean
Gesendet: Freitag, 29. August 2014 16:16
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
> we have 7 swcs and I bet there are dependenc
Do you think we need confirmation before proceeding? I think we should.
Practically speaking, how many folks will be able to use the release
without downloading a category X file?
For fonts, you can definitely use Flex without having to download a
category X font.
-Alex
On 8/29/14 7:21 AM, "Jus
Hi,
> Doesn't that create a dependency on category x?
Don't think so, it's more a dependency on a file format not a specific bit of
software, basically the same as a font file. eg Flex (and users of flex) can
use lots of different fonts, but we could only bundled a small subset of fonts
that a
Hi,
> we have 7 swcs and I bet there are dependencies.
Some of the swcs are dependent on the others.
ApacheFlexLinguisticUtils.swc
ApacheflexSpellingEngine.swc
ApacheFlexSpellingFramework.swc -> ApacheFlexLinguisticUtils.swc +
ApacheflexSpellingEngine.swc
ApacheFlexSpellingUI.swc -> ApacheFlexL
Hi,
> Hunspell format which is the same format as MySpell which is based on
> Ispell.
And I should of said Ispell is ancient [1] - " Ispell has a very long history
that can be traced back to a program that was originally written in 1971 in
PDP-10 Assembly language". That predates my program
project could be
displayed as some sort of tree.
Chris
Von: Justin Mclean
Gesendet: Freitag, 29. August 2014 12:20
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
> Could someone here quickly write down how
Hi,
> To use Squiggly, is the Hunspell dictionaries included at compile time or is
> it downloaded at runtime (or something else)?
Hunspell is not actually required at all, a dictionary may be required (if
specified) and that dictionary is in Hunspell format which is the same format
as MySpell
Hi,
> Could someone here quickly write down how the squiggly artifacts depend on
> each other and extenal dependencies?
Basically there are no complication dependancies other than you need the Flex
SDK (ie mxml and asdoc) to compile it. The ANE not in this release would
require air.
Justin
To use Squiggly, is the Hunspell dictionaries included at compile time or is it
downloaded at runtime (or something else)?
On Aug 29, 2014, at 1:24 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>> I am wondering how Hunspell is integrated here? Was it a port from C++ to
>> AS3?
>
> I'm not 100% sure but from what
. August 2014 09:07
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: AW: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
I think I'll whip up something in my +1 day today.
Well usually you deploy the jar/swc/rsl whatever and if you're really nice you
bundle the source zipped up in a jar together with the
Donnerstag, 28. August 2014 14:04
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
> Well it's a SWC isn't it?
Several swcs - look in the libs directory.
> Eventually all we have to do is write a pom with it's dependencies and an
>
Doesn't that create a dependency on category x?
Sent via the PANTECH Discover, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone.
Justin Mclean wrote:
Hi,
> I'm wondering if any of the dictionaries have no GPL components. If we
> can't find one that does, that may mean that Squiggly cannot be its own
> release packa
Hi,
>> Well it's a SWC isn't it?
>
> Several swcs - look in the libs directory.
>
>> Eventually all we have to do is write a pom with it's dependencies and an
>> Apache header, repo, license block etc and manually stage that RC in the
>> staging repo.
>
> Just the swcs or the code as well? G
Hi,
> I'm wondering if any of the dictionaries have no GPL components. If we
> can't find one that does, that may mean that Squiggly cannot be its own
> release package.
From a brief look I couldn't find one, so for now I think we just need to point
people in the right direction.
Thanks,
Justi
Hi,
>>> 1. There are two README files, one here [1] and one under the 'main'
>>> directory after unzipping the src/binary kit. We should merge those two,
>>> to avoid confusion.
Done
>>> 5. The apps under main/Demo/ does not seem to work
Until we can package a dictionary I've removed them fr
Hi,
> I am wondering how Hunspell is integrated here? Was it a port from C++ to
> AS3?
I'm not 100% sure but from whatI can tell the AS version supports Hunspell
dictionaries, and the ANE version (not in this release) uses Hunspell. I don't
think there's a port of Hunspell in the current relea
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:33 AM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > 1. There are two README files, one here [1] and one under the 'main'
> > directory after unzipping the src/binary kit. We should merge those two,
> > to avoid confusion.
> Can do.
>
Thanks!
>
> > 2. LICENSE file is incomplete
On 8/28/14 4:54 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> When I was prepping the donation, I was thinking we'd send folks to
>> Hunspell to get their dictionaries.
>
>Open Office extensions may be a better option being an Apache project?
>Looks like if you unziip an OO dictionary you get the files
Hi,
> Well it's a SWC isn't it?
Several swcs - look in the libs directory.
> Eventually all we have to do is write a pom with it's dependencies and an
> Apache header, repo, license block etc and manually stage that RC in the
> staging repo.
Just the swcs or the code as well? Given this is r
Hi,
> When I was prepping the donation, I was thinking we'd send folks to
> Hunspell to get their dictionaries.
Open Office extensions may be a better option being an Apache project? Looks
like if you unziip an OO dictionary you get the files you need.
> We could provide links, or maybe the
>
ions and to stage release versions. So we
can simply extend the zoo of little projects to release maven artifacts.
Chris
Von: Justin Mclean
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. August 2014 13:38
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidat
Hi,
> As we noticed with FlexUnit that simply releasing Maven artifacts of a
> previously released library isn't that easy (From Apache procedures ... the
> releasing itself is easy), I think we should think about releasing the maven
> artifacts together with the normal release.
So how do we r
Hi,
> 1. There are two README files, one here [1] and one under the 'main'
> directory after unzipping the src/binary kit. We should merge those two,
> to avoid confusion.
Can do.
> 2. LICENSE file is incomplete (there is a TODO section in there)
Git issue and it's been fixed, there's no addit
Chris
Von: omup...@gmail.com im Auftrag von OmPrakash Muppirala
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 28. August 2014 09:55
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
MD5 and signature looks good.
Compiles fine
I see some issues:
1. There ar
MD5 and signature looks good.
Compiles fine
I see some issues:
1. There are two README files, one here [1] and one under the 'main'
directory after unzipping the src/binary kit. We should merge those two,
to avoid confusion.
2. LICENSE file is incomplete (there is a TODO section in there)
3.
When I was prepping the donation, I was thinking we'd send folks to
Hunspell to get their dictionaries. We could provide links, or maybe the
ant script can offer to fetch one (with notification of license
differences first).
BTW, I ran out of time tonight to look at the RC. I'll look in my morni
Subject: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0
Hi,
Please place all of the discussion here rather than in the the thread.
Thanks,
Justin
HI,
Just in case anyone needs a simple test to try it out:
http://www.adobe.com/2006/mxml"; layout="vertical">
SpellingConfig.xml:
You need to provide en_US.aff and en_US.dic file and place in a data directory
but these can be
Hi,
While not a blocker, the main inconvenience I see with the current RC is that
is requirement the user to source a dictionary, as none were provided in
Adobe's donation. While it easy enough to take one from Adobe's version of
Squiggly that's not exactly optimal. What can we do about this?
Hi,
A few things to consider:
- More instructions on how to use would be useful (could we get permission to
use content from here?) [1]
- Do we need debug and non debug swc binary versions?
- Do we require ASDocs to be part of the first release or can that wait until a
later release?
- Should we
Hi,
Please place all of the discussion here rather than in the the thread.
Thanks,
Justin
79 matches
Mail list logo
