On 3/10/16, 7:32 PM, "Justin Mclean" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi, > >> Yes, but any code in the BSD version that isn't in the Apache version >> can't just be committed to the Apache repo without causing a mix of >> licenses. > >Not sure where you going with this. BSD is a Category A comparable >licence.[1] No-one has committed anything to the Apache repo from that >source code but if they did (and I’m not even sure it’s required) it >would be a simple matter of adding the Adobe BSD license/copyright to >LICENSE. [2] Having a mix of compatible licenses is non an issue and lot >of Apache project do that. If it was a large amount of the code it would >be nice to ask for permission first. Adobe intended to donate the latest version of FlexPMD and have it relicensed from BSD to ALv2. Chris Dutz is claiming the donated code is stale. Clint M pushed a copy he had to GH but claimed he got it from the same place I did. If his version is newer, it would be preferable to get any additional code in Clint's version donated and relicensed to ALv2. Yes, you can mix BSD and ALv2 code, but that is not the intent here, nor IMO, is it in the best interests of the ASF and the Apache Flex community to take code that is under BSD and not an SGA. We should try to get a good code base entirely under ALv2 when it is possible, and I believe it is possible in this situation, assuming Clint's version is in fact newer. Plus there's that whole thread on an ASF list about how to deal with source headers for mixed BSD and ALv2 content :-(. All-ALv2 will be much simpler, if this is even an issue at all. -Alex
