I do not believe this has been donated. The material would need a rewrite in the committer's own words, so that the result is clearly not a copy from the earlier material.
I would be happy to help with refreshing the text and examples, if the substance of the pull request is correct. a On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 4:15 PM joshtynjala (via GitHub) <g...@apache.org> wrote: > > joshtynjala commented on PR #30: > URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-docs/pull/30#issuecomment-2075661869 > > Some of the content in this PR appears to be copied from the Using > Adobe Flex documentation, which is licensed CC BY-NC-SA 3.0. > > > https://web.archive.org/web/20160322180947/http://help.adobe.com/en_US/flex/using/WS2db454920e96a9e51e63e3d11c0bf62883-7ff2.html > > According to [ASF 3rd Party License Policy]( > https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#asf-3rd-party-license-policy)](https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html), > we (unfortunately) may not be able to include documentation derived from a > CC **NC** license: > > > You may NOT include the following licenses within Apache products: > > Creative Commons Non-Commercial variants > > Unless a fellow contributor in Flex/Royale knows that Adobe donated > "Using Flex" to the ASF with Apache 2.0 or another compatible license? > > > -- > This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. > To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the > URL above to go to the specific comment. > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@royale.apache.org > > For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: > us...@infra.apache.org > > -- Andrew Wetmore Editor, Moose House Publications <https://moosehousepress.com/> Editor-Writer, The Apache Software Foundation <https://apache.org/>
