On 9/15/16, 4:17 PM, "Josh Tynjala" <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Wouldn't it be easier to leave the originally license header intact, even >if it may not necessarily be required, than to try to convince another >community to take ownership of the code? Not sure. If we give them copyright and we shouldn't have, can we take it back? In the long term, I think if it isn't too hard to get the CreateJS community to take over the externs, then we don't have to deal with maintaining the patch files that generate the externs. It is pretty fragile stuff. If CreateJS adds new APIs to both their library and the externs at the same time, we won't have to deal with the patch process not working. Same is true for any other third-party library. If FlexJS is successful, every third-party JS framework will want to have externs for FlexJS and it will be more efficient for both communities of the third-party community controls their externs. That we we aren't bothered with handling patches from them, etc. -Alex
