Ah that's why the name is familiar. I used it in the Installer :-) Thanks for the info!
Regards, Om On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > The feature I probably use most often in the zip functionality. It has the > best zip library (formally FZip). > > But there’s tons of helper functions and containers as well. > > Take a look here: https://github.com/AS3Commons > > and here: https://code.google.com/p/as3-commons/source/browse/trunk > > On Dec 3, 2015, at 10:01 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Do we have a list of features or an URL we can look at? > > > > Thanks, > > Om > > > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> +1. > >> > >> There’s lot’s useful stuff in AS3Commons. > >> > >> On Dec 3, 2015, at 7:18 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> It has been my understanding that any existing code base that gets > stored > >>> in an Apache Flex repo must be "donated" via the Apache Software Grant > >>> process, which essentially requires that the author of every line of > code > >>> in the code base needs to sign a legally-binding document. > >>> > >>> I just found out that, while that is still the preferred method, if a > >> code > >>> base is already under the Apache License, it can also be "adopted" with > >>> much less hassle. > >>> > >>> Christophe Herreman, who also happens to be on our PMC, and one of the > >>> major contributors to AS3Commons, is interested in having Apache Flex > >>> adopt the AS3Commons code. I think this would be a good move for > Apache > >>> Flex because we use some of AS3Commons in the Installer already so it > >>> would be good to have this code in a place we can control, especially > if > >>> we want to see how much of it will work in FlexJS. > >>> > >>> So, first we should discuss whether we want to adopt AS3Commons and > >>> actually vote on it, then we will try to contact by email every past > >>> contributor to AS3Commons to see if they have any objections to having > >> the > >>> code base adopted by Apache Flex. The wording of the email is still > >> being > >>> finalized on the Apache legal-discuss mailing list, but basically, > >> instead > >>> of having to track down every past contributor and get their signature > on > >>> a Software Grant, we can now just gather email responses from as many > of > >>> those past contributors as we can. > >>> > >>> After the email goes out, we'll wait 30 days or so for responses. If > we > >>> get an objection from a past contributor, then we'll look to see what > >>> lines of code they contributed and determine what the impact would be > of > >>> not having those lines of code in our code base. It might be easily > >>> replaceable. If we don't hear from a past contributor we will look at > >> the > >>> risk of what might happen if they do respond later with an objection. > >>> > >>> So, we don't have to actually hear from every past contributor in order > >> to > >>> proceed with the adoption, but we might decide not to complete the > >>> adoption if we get objections from or don't get a response from a major > >>> contributor. > >>> > >>> Technically and legally, we could "fork" this code without permission > >> from > >>> anybody since the code is under the Apache License, but socially, > Apache > >>> wants all code to come in voluntarily, which is why we want to make > sure > >>> there are no objections from past contributors as well as anyone on > this > >>> mailing list. > >>> > >>> Thoughts? > >>> -Alex > >>> > >> > >> > >
