99% of my companies Maven repo is filled with stuff containing several licenses, but these are all some sort of open-source licenses and there is no manual effort needed to have Nexus/Artifactory automatically import them from other repos. For those 1% of the commercial libs, I usually only have to deploy them manually. Fortunately they are usually only one or two jars or swcs/swfs so this isn't a big issue. Having to deploy all of the artifacts of Flex however would take me a full week of manual uploading of artifacts. This is the main Issue with deploying the Flex SDKs ... the number of artifacts.
Regarding your legal questions about being allowed to upload commercial libs to a companies repo. I guess this is a gray zone. Usually the licenses allow you to use a lib but don't tell you how you are allowed to save it. Certainly it would be allowed to store the zip with my libs on a remote file-share ... I think of maven being exactly the same. Most licenses are bound to the number of developers using it and this is something I have to handle inside my company. No matter if I distribute the files using Maven or by copying the content of a zip from one share to another. Chris [ C h r i s t o f e r D u t z ] C-Ware IT-Service Inhaber Dipl. Inf. Christofer Dutz Karlstraße. 104, 64285 Darmstadt IT- und Systemhäuser fon: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 61 fax: 0 61 51 / 27315 - 64 mobil: 0171 / 7 444 2 33 email: christofer.d...@c-ware.de http://www.c-ware.de UStId-Nr. DE195700962 -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Oktober 2012 18:18 An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Flex Maven FDK Generator RC1 On 10/15/12 11:57 PM, "christofer.d...@c-ware.de" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > But I think adding not adding potentially very usefull information, > just because noone uses it will certainly not help the tag being used > some day ;-) .. I know that Artifactory Pro for example allows to > filter artifacs based on this information. So I think adding these > tags to the pom will not do any harm, but provide some information that could > be valuable in the future. I don't have any problem with filling out the license tags, but I'm not sure that will be sufficient for Adobe. > > What groupId are you talking about? The general gid I was using > "com.adobe.flex", "com.adobe.flash" and "com.adobe.air"? If Adobe > would like to have something different here, now is the time for me to > adjust this. So please simply tell me what to use instead ... I am > also glad to change anything else Adobe or Apache would like me to > change. This is the main reason for taking this issue to this > mailinglist :-) In the end I would like to have Mavenized FDKs all > participants can live with. I'm not sure if Adobe will want to change things like com.adobe.flash.framework or not. There is no guarantee that Adobe will agree to hosting POMs for its pieces (and explode out the AIR SDK, for example). But I need to get familiar enough with it so I can ask about it. Can the AIR SDK be in ZIP/TAR form or does it have to be broken out? I would find it hard to believe that every other Maven artifact in the world has a permissive license. Do you know of any artifacts that have proprietary licenses? How do they handle their licensing? If the general rule is that there are no licensing prompts in Maven and I can point to other Adobe-like corporations who are ok with that, then I have a better chance of getting Adobe to pass on requiring licensing dialogs. I agree for now that having folks download the Adobe stuff first is "safer" legally, but having all of these separate downloads is a pain point (and is one of the good things about the Installer), so getting Adobe stuff to be legitimate Maven dependencies is currently worth a try. -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
