PDA

View Full Version : Where is GXT 2.0.2?



micgala
22 Sep 2009, 5:54 AM
Hello.

I guess that I am not the only one who takes part on discussions on the forum almost everyday.

For sometime now I could notice that the ones with support subscription have already access to gxt 2.0.2. And I am not talking about the last version on SVN.

Current version on SVN, as I could tell from some topics, is already 2.0.3.

I hope I am wrong, but I would like to ask:

1 - Is 2.0.2 really final already? - It seems so, because changes are already being applied to 2.0.3

2 - When should we expect 2.0.2 to be released to everyone else?

3 - Will it always be like this from now on? The ones who subscribe will get the official releases at first? Hope this is not the case... because the community also helps, as we can see in the bug reports...

Best regards,
Michel.

netRapid
22 Sep 2009, 10:37 PM
Hello,

2.0.2 is only available in the support area of GXT. But as GXT is open source anyway I think no one makes a complaint if I give you a download link to it.
But you have to know that 2.0.2 has some bugs left in.

regards,

baskor
23 Sep 2009, 4:22 AM
I can see on the download page, that there is a "2.0.2 Supported Release" available to users with a support subscription.
I can understand that you want to give paying users some benefits, but you have to remember that people who have bought a license are also "supporting the Ext Team" as you argue on the download page.

My opinion is that everyone should get access to these "supported releases".

Arno.Nyhm
24 Sep 2009, 5:44 AM
But as GXT is open source anyway I think no one makes a complaint if I give you a download link to it.

i think you can not give this download link away to non premium members because this option is only available to support subscribers:
http://www.extjs.com/store/gxt/#support-table

netRapid
24 Sep 2009, 5:52 AM
Hi,

good answer, but what part of the GPL says that I can't redistribute source code that is under the GPL (as long as I redistribute it under the terms of the GPL)?
Anyway I wont publish the supported release here as I am not sure about the consequences. But maybe there is someone who has a deeper insight into licensing issues like this. I think this problem could also occur on any other GPL software with "premium members".

regards,

micgala
24 Sep 2009, 6:41 AM
Having access to the trunk is not the purpose of my initial thread.
It is ok to charge for trunk access... of course I would prefer to also having access to the trunk but it is ok.

What I don't consider ok, is having one release that is ready (no one told me otherwise, so I still thing 2.0.2 is READY) and not releasing this to everyone... only to subscribers...

I don't consider this a nice thing.
This is what I was talking about..

Regards,
Michel.

pepez
25 Sep 2009, 12:41 AM
I find current situation confusing. The latest publicly available GXT release is 2.0.1 at the moment. Previously, all releases have been public but now it looks like they rather post a teaser link to attract more paying customers.

This has not been communicated very clearly. There is no word about the next public GXT release or the release policy between public/support clients only.

micgala
25 Sep 2009, 2:25 AM
I find current situation confusing. The latest publicly available GXT release is 2.0.1 at the moment. Previously, all releases have been public but now it looks like they rather post a teaser link to attract more paying customers.

This has not been communicated very clearly. There is no word about the next public GXT release or the release policy between public/support clients only.

This is exactly my concern.

I hope we can hear from some ext member soon regarding this serious situation.

Regards,
Michel.

Arno.Nyhm
25 Sep 2009, 3:46 AM
yes. the problem is you (as the user) can not estimate how long to wait for the next release of 2.0.2 :-(

and if you are in a evaluation phase of the gxt library its hard to evaluate this with this many workarounds and (already fixed but not released FNR=) bugs :-(

netRapid
25 Sep 2009, 3:54 AM
Another problem comes up if you would like to publish an open source project that includes a "support release". If I understand the agreement correctly you can only use it for your own project. But how can I manage that no one gets "my" supported release out of "my" open source project?
This is rather hypothetical as I don't develop an open source software with GXT at the moment. But this point is also open.

In the meantime I am rather happy with the current version (SVN). It is stable, fast and looks nice. =D> Thanks GXT developers! =D> =D> =D>

pepez
28 Sep 2009, 1:03 AM
That is an important point. We have an open source project with GPL license and we are using GXT 2.0.1 at the moment. But we cannot make a release as long as we are stuck with 2.0.1. So our options are to downgrade to 1.2.4, buy the the support for a year in order to get 2.0.2+ or drop GXT altogether.

The second option is not really clear in terms of GXT licensing as we would be distributing GXT libraries with the open source application.

jpnet
29 Sep 2009, 6:36 AM
To withhold releases from your paying commercial customers is a bad business model. One, that will surely come back to hurt ExtJS LLC eventually.

This whole situation is frustrating. ExtJS LLC is frustrating. Their lack of transparency is troubling.

This post was started over a week ago and we haven't had one response from ExtJS LLC. What gives?

jburnhams
29 Sep 2009, 7:14 AM
There was a similar post in the ExtJs forum about patch releases. Abe posted this comment (http://www.extjs.com/forum/showthread.php?p=390376#post390376) which I assume is on behalf of Ext LLC.

micgala
29 Sep 2009, 7:39 AM
Right...
I could see that he didn't answer, again, the initial question on that thread...
It seems like Ext licensing guys are running away from the subject...

What will be the next release that EVERYONE will have access too??
Only Gxt 2.1?

We will have to live with 2.0.1 and all its bugs, some of them reported by the community, until when?

Nothing against Gxt Developers, in special Sven and Darrell, but this situation is getting very, very frustrating...
I hope people responsible for this decision think carefully about this...

GPL to LGPL was a change (big change, but, in my point of view, acceptable).
Now keeping important bugs, resolved, not released to everyone is unacceptable for a open source project.

abe.elias
29 Sep 2009, 8:28 PM
I will make an attempt to contact each of you individually. But for those that stumble upon this in the future, I'm including this reply for clarification.

Let us begin with some history to put your concerns in context.

Since the beginning of Ext, we have had support subscriptions that enabled access to retrieve the latest and greatest from SVN. When we had a small team, trunk remained pretty stable, but not as stable as our customers would have liked. Many of our customers complained that SVN was the wild west where API changes and enhancements were regular, and as a result so were breaking changes to their code.

To further complicate matters, we were releasing what to some appeared to be a "patch" (ie. 2.2.1) when in reality it was just another snapshot of trunk - aka the wild west. What determined a "patch" was just the proximity to our prior release. So if we needed to put out another release quickly, we would just tack on another decimal point and hope we didn't introduce more bugs with commits that were unrelated to what we were trying to fix.

Many of our customers shared with us that they had internal teams reviewing our commits, and building their own internal Ext release. Our larger customers even had their own QA as their internal teams delivered these custom versions. If our larger customers were doing this, what about our smaller ones? They didn't even have the resources to dedicate to such an undertaking. This is when we knew we needed to raise the bar for ourselves.

While we got it right more often than not, the entire team felt our support subscribers deserved a better system. We went out and invested in a QA team to do just that. This team is dedicated to reviewing the SVN commits and electing them to a staging branch for inclusion in a monthly release. If they meet a basic set of criteria - no enhancement, no public api change, no new bugs, we proceed to build these releases so our support customers don't have to. Our non-subscribers are not receiving anything "less", it's just our support subscribers are getting more.

In addition, we made a commitment to our community to merge all these patches into a minor release along with additional new features from our road map. Our community will now receive more timely, stable releases via minor releases than ever before. We've even have a public "recent commit log" to have more transparency with our community to reflect what is hitting SVN for those that do not have a support subscription.

We value our community greatly, and appreciate you allowing us to share in your successes.