Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

Hi, > Assuming "Fix header" means "notify upstream" and work with the third > party project until they are satisfied, feel free to do so, but I think > you are doing so as an individual, not as a representative of the ASF or > the Apache Flex PMC. Fix header means correct the issue with the

Re: AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

I poked around a bit more, and remain confused. -Looks like folks already use Jekyll at Apache. Is Jekyll different from gitpubsub or a component of it? -Is use of Maven to convert source to html an alternative to using Jekyll or does Maven call Jekyll? -Does gitpubsub also go to a staging

Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

On 10/2/16, 6:09 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote: >Hi, > >The discussion on legal-discuss has died down [1] and this as I see it >the consensus: >1. Notify upstream and ask them to fix their issue. >2. Only parts of the license that relate to what is actually bundled >needs

Re: Current FlexJS license/notice issues

Hi, The discussion on legal-discuss has died down [1] and this as I see it the consensus: 1. Notify upstream and ask them to fix their issue. 2. Only parts of the license that relate to what is actually bundled needs to be included. 3. When missing retrospectively adding headers and copyright

Re: AW: [FalconJX][FlexJS] COMPJSC and Build order

That would be ideal! - Josh On Oct 1, 2016 10:47 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > One more thought on this: now that COMPJSC can more or less build its own > output instead of relying on COMPC to package its pile of .js files, it > might be worth experimenting with combining Falcon

Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

It is also possible to use ``` for a code block in markdown. No indentation required. You can also specify the language. ``` actionscript code ``` - Josh On Oct 2, 2016 2:54 AM, "Christofer Dutz" wrote: > Well they couldn't give me much info on what others are

AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

I missed your last part. jekyl doesn't really do the conversion you can use asciidoc in github too ... Just have a look at the three adoc files I have in the compiler repo. It's just a plugin to jekyl, the same way markdown ist too. Chris Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet.

AW: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Hi Alex, Well no software on the world renders Markdown as HTML in the browser. There is always a conversion involved. The solution with the orphan branch in Github simply triggers their conversion tool they have built into their system. But which has to be taken as it is and the projects

Re: AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Thanks for looking into this. That sounds like a lot of steps. In the little reading I did of GH pages, it appeared that we could create an 'orphan' branch with a specific name in any of our existing repos and simply pushing files to the branch would kick off an update of the site. I would

AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Ok so I did a little searching: It seems that in general if you setup a git repo and define an "asf-site" branch in that (of course have Infra register the repo in their system), stuff pushed to that branch is automatically published as website. I just tested it, the maven site plugin is

AW: [DISCUSS] Switch the site repo to GIT?

Well they couldn't give me much info on what others are using, but I dug a little myself. So it seems that they use Jekyl to convert Markdown into HTML. There however is a plugin to use Asciidoctor to do the same. Having used both Asciidoctor and Markdown, I think Asciidoctor is far more