>wouldn't that be essentially the same as them "blessing" our framework, which >is something they were unwilling to do in the first place? From what I >remember, that is the entire beef they had -- they didn't want to say that our >>framework was worthy of an RSL, unless it went through their security review >first.
It's a little different in that, we would simply be asking that they are acknowledging something is an official release from Apache, not that our bits should be cached in the player, just the hashes of the official bits. I do not think this is practical or that they will do so... just saying it is one way to solve the issue if they were interested
