AIUI, as long as we can build TDF by downloading third-party SWCs as part of the build process it doesn't even have to be compatibly-licensed. We might have to note such content in the README or in the UI. But you are right that it adds complexity.
In the SDK, Adobe font libraries are downloaded because font embedding is an optional feature. I would argue that a 3rd party sample is also an optional feature of TDF. -Alex On 8/25/14 3:41 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: >-1 > >We dont want 3rd party folks to donate example sources to us. It would be >better if they hosted the swf and mxml files on their sites and we load it >externally. We would just need to update the explorer.xml app from our >side. > >That is what Adobe used to recommend as well [1] > >Otherwise, to build and example swf, 3rd party folks have to donate their >library swcs to us (they wont want to donate the source of the components) >That is not acceptable to us because we cannot have binary artifacts in >our >releases. > >Thanks, >Om > >[1] http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/tourdeflex.html > > >On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> >wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > In the original tour-de-flex, there was a section with third party >>tools >> - >> > there were a number of third party tools (including ours - >> flexicious.com) >> > is there something we can do to resurrect this? >> >> Mind raising a JIRA for this? >> >> I believe there were some 3rd party examples in the donation but we >>would >> probably need to get permission for each owner before including them >>and on >> our side there may be complexity around building, bundling and licensing >> (unless the 3rd party code is also Apache licensed). >> >> Thanks, >> Justin
