On Jan 1, 2013 11:44 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > On 1/1/13 11:30 PM, "Om" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> > >> On 1/1/13 11:09 PM, "Om" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> On Jan 1, 2013 10:42 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Ok, here is my logic: > >>>> > >>>> -From [1], a release is "anything that is published beyond the group > >> that > >>>> owns it.". Putting the config.xml on the site to be consumed by one of > >>> our > >>>> binaries makes it part of a release and requires a vote before it > >> happens. > >>> > >>> I still don't agree with this logic. The config xml is placed on our > >>> website which is completely under our control. Which means that we don't > >>> really 'release' it. > >> We are taking something from SVN and consuming it in a binary distribution > >> that we've deployed to our site and telling the world to use it. > >> > > > > We consume a lot of resources from the website - the flex sdk, the md5, the > > mirror url cgi script (which IS code). We dont release any of those in the > > source kit for the Installer. How is the config xml any different? > > > > We also consume a host of external dependencies like flash player, air sdk, > > etc. According to your logic, we cannot do this because we cannot > > 'release' those files. > It is in our SVN with the rest of our code and dictates what the code does. > None of the other things you listed do both. >
I don't see these two conditions in the Apache release guide. It is your interpretation of what it says, which I don't agree with. In any case, what exactly do you mean by 'dictate'? Please explain how that makes it source? Why is the mirror cgi script not considered to being 'dictating' the app? > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui >
