Hi Alex, On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > ...I'm still confused about how to "resolve" FLEX-53. In my > understanding, given the current license, we aren't really looking to > "include in a distribution" so I'm not clear we have to meet the definition > of "build tools"...
IIUC the binary files mentioned in FLEX-53 are more like "build time dependencies". Am I correct that they are not needed to distribute or run applications built with Apache Flex? That's an important point. > ... Or is a JDK "included in a distribution" of other > products? My main concern is the "library or lesser license" part of the > definition... The JDK is not included in distribution of Apache projects that use the Java language. IIUC we don't need to distribute the FLEX-53 binary files, but just point people to them? That would be analogous to a JDK then. > > I think I want to show that this is equivalent of the JDK and is a > prerequisite to be downloaded and installed by someone... It looks like this is the case - my goal with FLEX-53 is to clarify exactly how those binary files are used by Apache Flex users, so that we have a documented explanation of how/when people are bound by the licenses of those files. As discussed in this thread, not needing those files would be best, but I assume it's much more work technically. -Bertrand
