Actually, the Apache repo is now the canonical branch to go on. I'll post the URI when I get back to a keyboard.
BTW: Have you signed the ICLA yet? If not we should get that taken care of ASAP On May 5, 2014 5:56 PM, "Hu, Ningxin" <ningxin...@intel.com> wrote: > Ian, > > I initiated the proposal to crosswalk stakeholders about hosting the > Crosswalk Cordova Engine in Crosswalk projects. The feedback is very > positive. I am now going through the required legal/license clearance > process. I will keep you posted about the status. > > Thanks, > -ningxin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: iclell...@google.com [mailto:iclell...@google.com] On Behalf Of > Ian > > Clelland > > Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2014 2:23 AM > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [Android] Refactoring for different engines > > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > So, when Apache publishes something, it has fill the following > criteria: > > > > > > - All source code must have their licence headers intact > > > - All third-party source code must be mentioned in the NOTICE file > > > - No Binary Blobs - No compiled libraries, which include JARs and > > > shared object files (including the pak). > > > > > > Now, with Crosswalk, there's obviously the Chromium Library that we > > > need, so we need a way to get that into the generated project somehow. > > > The easiest way is with plugman, but the issue is that Apache can't > > > legally pass around binary blobs when it does an official release of > > > anything. Intel, OTOH, isn't restricted by cumbersome open source > > > foundation rules, and can do so. > > > > > > > Intel has their own rules to follow, certainly, but we're presuming here > that Intel > > has already worked out the legal requirements to distribute Crosswalk in > the first > > place, so the idea of Intel also distributing the "official" Crosswalk > Cordova Engine > > plugin just seems to make a lot of sense. > > > > Apache distributes Cordova-Android, which defines the integration API, > and > > includes the default AndroidWebView classes, and other parties should be > free > > to distribute their own engine plugins, implementing that API. That > distribution > > can then be in any form that makes sense (and complies with the licenses > of the > > various components) > > > > Joe's right that it would be awkward, if not impossible, for Apache to > distribute > > the Crosswalk core library. We'd have to include the 15GB of source as > well, at the > > very least, and that doesn't sound like fun at all. > > It *is* all open-source, but there are a lot of different licenses in > there, and we'd > > need some lawyerly help to make sure that the ASF could release software > that > > included it all. > > > > Ian > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Hu, Ningxin <ningxin...@intel.com> > wrote: > > > >> - who publishes the plugins, intel or cordova? > > > > > > > > For this open, could someone elaborate it a little bit more? What > > > > does > > > it mean? I remembered someone mentioned the license is open in the > > > hangouts, any details? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > -ningxin > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of > > > >> Michal Mocny > > > >> Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2014 12:53 AM > > > >> To: dev > > > >> Subject: Re: [Android] Refactoring for different engines > > > >> > > > >> Notes: > > > >> > > > >> - native junit tests needs fixing (due to deprication) > > > >> > > > >> - common script for creating walk mobilespec > > > >> > > > >> - fix failing mobile spec tests (file-transfer?, media?) > > > >> > > > >> - who publishes the plugins, intel or cordova? > > > >> > > > >> - static vs dynamic xwalk lib > > > >> > > > >> - (option) one plugin, use hooks to download static library > > > >> > > > >> - (option) one plugin, just bundle static lib > > > >> > > > >> - (option) one plugin, download static lib on app run > > > >> > > > >> - (option) two plugins, xwalk lib bundled in a separate plugin, > > > >> and > > > can be added > > > >> as a <dep>? > > > >> > > > >> - intel vs arm binary apk targets for CLI. Two android platforms, > > > >> or > > > just two build > > > >> targets? > > > >> > > > >> - How long to get GeckoView: Joe not sure. days to weeks :( > > > >> > > > >> - Not blocking, though > > > >> > > > >> - plugman works to install but CLI does not, lets figure that out > > > >> > > > >> - Other platforms: Windows Phone support!? BB10?! > > > >> > > > >> - Can we share code between xwalk WebViewClient and gecko view > > > >> WebViewClient etc? > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Josh Soref > > > >> <jso...@blackberry.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Ian Clelland wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > https://staging.talkgadget.google.com/hangouts/_/7ecpi3uaclcuedn7imn6b > > > >> > 9jdq > > > >> > >c > > > >> > > > > >> > https://talkgadget.google.com/hangouts/_/7ecpi3uaclcuedn7imn6b9jd > > > >> > qc > > > >> > > > > >> > Might work. Staging is probably internal. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >
