incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jan i <>
Subject Re: [IP CLEARANCE] Radii8 for Apache Flex
Date Fri, 22 Aug 2014 19:47:13 GMT
On 22 August 2014 05:43, Justin Mclean <> wrote:

> Hi,
> Mostly good but -1 (binding) as it still needs a little more clean up
-1 (binding), but I hope the project can fast solve the minor issues
mentioned. The code granted seems well written and quite interesting.

> First off the code in bundle for IP clearance doesn't match what is
> recorded in the grant. The grant specifies this [1]. Not sure if this is a
> major issue or not but I expected them to be the same.

at least the differences should be explained, especially if the bundle
contain files not mentioned in the grant, so quessing is avoided.

> While the Github repo only has one user, some of the code varies in style
> which may indicate that the code came from multiple people/sources and is
> of unknown licence. For example concatenateMetaDataXMLItems in
> in com.flexcapacitor.utils. A quick google search turns up
> the same code here [2] which a) predates the code being in the github repo
> and may of been where the code may of came from. Of course not easy to tell
> but this at least needs confirmation that this is not an issue.  I notice
> that this file may incorrectly have an Apache licence header but they
> depends on the license of the code in question. In the same file I also see
> isSimple which looks like it was copied from the Flex SDK (not an issue
> just an observation) but could also indicate that source in this file has
> come from various different places. I only checked a couple of methods in
> that file and only a few likely files so there may be other files/methods
> with similar issues in the donation.
> Solution is to get the donor to double check that all code was written by
> then and/or has a compatible licence, in particular when the style is
> different.

While it can be hard to identify copied code, the bare minimum is that
donor states its not copied code or donor/project identifies the license in
the original source, and put a clear remark in the source, giving
contribution to the original owner.

> There are also possibly some icons than may have non compatatble licences
> in there. I'm not aware of the original license of the icons but as most
> icons have been blacked out I assume that it was a non compatible one.
> Here are some of the non blacked out ones. I may of missed some.
> ./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/down_disclosure.png
> ./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/down_disclosure2.png
> ./Radii8LibraryAssets/src/assets/icons/effects/divider_vertical.png
> ./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/down_disclosure2.png
> ./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/more.png
> ./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/more2.png
> ./Radii8LibraryAssets/src/assets/icons/effects/playhead_light.png
> ./Radii8LibraryAssets/src/assets/icons/effects/playhead.png
> Easy solution is to black out these files - assuming they have an
> incompatible licence that is.
> A minor issue may exist with the binary file PortraitMode.psd. Does this
> need to be a photoshop file or can it be converted to a different format?
> If not are we OK with photoshop files in the repo?
I am in general not happy with binary files in vendor specific format, by
redistributing such files as ASF (not as an individual) we may run into
license violations.

In case such a file really need to be part of the repo, please acompany it
with a text file, that clearly states why the file needs to be in that
format and whether the vendor (in this case adobe) has any redistribution

I'll also note that these issues could of been fixed before bringing it to
> the incubator if the Flex PMC rather than a single person had been involved
> in grant process.
In our busy world, its often few people that move things so I dont expect
every PMC to be involved in everything every day. One of the reasons why we
vote for a release is to have a synchronization point (point of no return),
where the whole PMC must (should) care.

jan i

> Thanks,
> Justin
> 1
> 2.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message