Turkiyenin en sevilen filmlerinin yer aldigi porno internet sitemiz olan ve sex tarzi bir site olan sitemiz gercekten dillere destan bir durumda herkesin sevdigi bir site olarak tarihe gececege benziyor. Sitenin en belirgin ozelliklerinden birisi de Turkiyede gercekten kaliteli ve muntazam, duzenli siteleri olmamasidir. Bu yuzden iste. Ayrica en net goruntu kalitesine sahip adresinde yayinlanmaktadir.
Gelmiş geçmiş en büyük porno sitemiz olan 2pe de her zaman en kaliteli pornoları sunmayı hedefledik. Diğer video sitemiz olan vuam da ise hd porno ağırlıklı çalışmalara başladık.
The general release is completely free. They gotta make money some how so they give great support to people who buy a subscription.
I am not questioning the quality of their support. It doesn't answer my question. If Sencha Touch is free, then why is version 1.0.2, which is supposedly more stable than 1.0.1a, available only to support subscribers? I shouldn't be forced to buy support subscription to be able to get a more stable version of the framework, which is distributed for free.
If you had customers that paid and customers that didn't, which would you give the latest too? I have been using Ext stuff for a while now and this is just how they do it. Developers are expensive to pay.
You're missing the point. Purchasing support subscription is not the same as purchasing the product. The product is free, support is not. So I don't understand how support subscribers get the privilege to use a more stable version of a free product. And if I had declared my product as absolutely free for everyone, I would give the latest version to everyone.
I think they really need to define a third license. I think they have one product with three licenses: GPL, Commercial and Paid. I'm sure I can't redistribute 1.0.2 to other members, so that's not quite the same license. Or can you? If so, could someone kindly send me 1.0.2?
The big problem I have is that this is really starting to bother me from the standpoint of bug reporting. I've been reporting a lot of bugs. A lot of other bugs have been reported. They've never been commented on. Are they fixed on 1.0.2? Who knows! Should I bother entering this bug I just found in 1.0.1a because it might already be fixed? Who knows! It's just rather frustrating. If I could get some information that I requested in the other thread, I might start trying to get my boss to fork over for the standard support. However, as far as I can tell there's no premium forum and you pay $300 to ask 4 questions that will be handled in under 3 days each.
You may not, without Our prior written consent, redistribute the Software or Modifications other
than by including the Software or a portion thereof within Your own product, which must have
substantially different functionality than the Software or Modifications and must not allow any
third party to use the Software or Modifications, or any portions thereof, for software development
or application development purposes. You are explicitly not allowed to redistribute the Software or
Modifications as part of any product that can be described as a development toolkit or library or is
intended for use by software developers or application developers and not end-users. You are not
allowed to redistribute any part of the Software documentation.
At least, that's what the commercial license says. I have no idea if the super-secret advance version gets its own special top secret license.