Re: rc_flex-sdk_mustella-air - Build # 57 - Fixed!

2014-12-20 Thread Alex Harui
Maybe check the VM. If AIR isn’t running because of some popup that could cause 0 results. -Alex On 12/20/14, 11:35 AM, "e...@ixsoftware.nl" wrote: >This is the weirdest result yet. 0 tests results? > >Can someone see what's going on? > >EdB > > > >On Saturday, December 20, 2014, wrote: > >>

Re: [4.14] binary vs. source package legal docs

2014-12-20 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, Also on this subject I've no idea why we are prompting for SWFObject when it is MIT licensed, as MIT is an compatible licence. The same should apply to any Category A licenses (ie Apache 1.1, BSD and W3C). The installer probably needs some changes from this as it is installing from the bin

Re: [4.14] binary vs. source package legal docs

2014-12-20 Thread Justin Mclean
HI, > It looks like we have not handled Saxon correctly since forever. The install > scripts need to prompt for it. Not sure we actually do need to prompt as per [1] you only need to prompt to download the source not the binary. The week copy left aspects of the licence only apply if you in

Re: [4.14] binary vs. source package legal docs

2014-12-20 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, > This is a great find. I only found Saxon to not have Category A license. > Did you find the others? Here what I just checked: commons-collections.jar Apache 1.1 commons-discovery.jar Apache 1.1 commons-logging.jar Apache 2.0 has NOTICE no with no downstream effects javacc.jar version 5 B

Re: rc_flex-sdk_mustella-mobile - Build # 63 - Still Failing!

2014-12-20 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
On Dec 20, 2014 10:41 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote: > > OK, the mobile builds (both RC and develop) are consistently failing > about 85 tests. > > Can someone have a look and see what might have caused the failures? I > think they have been failing for quite a long while now... So, the > cause might

Re: rc_flex-sdk_mustella-air - Build # 57 - Fixed!

2014-12-20 Thread Erik de Bruin
This is the weirdest result yet. 0 tests results? Can someone see what's going on? EdB On Saturday, December 20, 2014, wrote: > rc_flex-sdk_mustella-air - Build # 57 - Fixed: > > http://flex-mustella.cloudapp.net/job/rc_flex-sdk_mustella-air/57/ > > Changes for Build #56 > [erik] FLEX-26703

Re: rc_flex-sdk_mustella-mobile - Build # 63 - Still Failing!

2014-12-20 Thread Erik de Bruin
OK, the mobile builds (both RC and develop) are consistently failing about 85 tests. Can someone have a look and see what might have caused the failures? I think they have been failing for quite a long while now... So, the cause might be an older commit. EdB On Sat, Dec 20, 2014 at 6:14 PM,

Re: [4.14] binary vs. source package legal docs

2014-12-20 Thread Alex Harui
This is a great find. I only found Saxon to not have Category A license. Did you find the others? It looks like we have not handled Saxon correctly since forever. The install scripts need to prompt for it. Any volunteers to make the changes or should I do it? The LICENSE.bin is definitely out

[4.14] # Apache Flex SDK 4.14 nightly build 46: Successful

2014-12-20 Thread flex . ci . builds
flex-sdk_release-candidate - Build #46 - Successful Changes since last build: [akamud] FlatSpark - Changed property name to 'fixedFontSize' to better describe its meaning For more information, check the console output at http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/flex-sdk_release-candidate/4

Re: git commit: [flex-sdk] [refs/heads/release4.14.0] - Changed FlatSpark property to maintain proportions' name to 'fixedAspectRatio'

2014-12-20 Thread Mahmoud Ali
It wasn't. Olaf also pointed this could cause some confusion, so I changed it to "fixedFontSize", which describes way better.

Re : Re: FishEye accounts

2014-12-20 Thread Frédéric THOMAS
Actually that's Atlassian, will ask them tomorrow if no one do it before, Im amost in the plane right now --- Message initial --- De : "Alex Harui" Envoyé : 20 décembre 2014 08:35 A : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: FishEye accounts Interesting. I can reproduce your problem by logging in. Is

[4.14] # Apache Flex SDK 4.14 nightly build 45: Successful

2014-12-20 Thread flex . ci . builds
flex-sdk_release-candidate - Build #45 - Successful Changes since last build: [erik] Added some bits about the various ways to get the source code for the SDK For more information, check the console output at http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/flex-sdk_release-candidate/45/.

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Flex 4.14.0

2014-12-20 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, > I cannot reproduce this. What were your steps before this attempt? I believe did an ant super-clean, follow by an ant main, then ant clean and ant main again and that error showed up. This was on a clean checked out source tree not on an expanded binary release and on OSX. Currently thi

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Flex 4.14.0

2014-12-20 Thread Erik de Bruin
>> Maybe because there is no difference in the LICENSE for source and binary >> packages? > > The binary package bundles extra 3rd party jars such as Saxon which is MPL > licensed [1], that requires change to LICENSE right? The MPL was removed > from LICENSE in this release. Also both Xerces an

[4.14] binary vs. source package legal docs

2014-12-20 Thread Erik de Bruin
Hi, just continuing this discussion here... This is the state we left it in the other thread: >> Maybe because there is no difference in the LICENSE for source and binary >> packages? > >The binary package bundles extra 3rd party jars such as Saxon which is MPL >licensed [1], >that requires cha

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Flex 4.14.0

2014-12-20 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi, > Maybe because there is no difference in the LICENSE for source and binary > packages? The binary package bundles extra 3rd party jars such as Saxon which is MPL licensed [1], that requires change to LICENSE right? The MPL was removed from LICENSE in this release. Also both Xerces and Xa