1. #1
    Sencha Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    62
    Vote Rating
    3
    valio is on a distinguished road

      1  

    Default GPL = bad? [was: Is Sencha screwing single developers?]

    GPL = bad? [was: Is Sencha screwing single developers?]


    Quote Originally Posted by seade View Post
    LGPL was actually one of the reasons I selected Ext JS way back there. If I was looking for a framework now (as many of us here are) I would probably be looking carefully at the open source license they use. ASL, LGPL, etc. = good, GPL = bad (I'll now duck for cover).
    I don't see the issue there.
    The basic premise of the GPL was that the code is kept free (copyleft) for everyone.
    I would be interested: what is your issue with the code being GPL?
    Sencha offers one the choice of contributing your code either to the community or to "keep it" and in return contribute to the company who developed it, by licensing the product.

    The thing I hate about the licensing at Sencha is the Sencha license itself which (theoretically) prohibits double licensing code that one had originally developed oneself as GPL code. And of course the very stupid move to get rid of single developer licenses (which will stiffen innovation for certain and could likely accelerate the extinction of ExtJS).

  2. #2
    Sencha User Tim Toady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    570
    Vote Rating
    181
    Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold Tim Toady is a splendid one to behold

      3  

    Default


    The reason people didn't like the change to GPL was that copyleft would now apply to their code. LGPL limited it to the library. Indeed it was necessary for a business wanting to sell commercial licenses, but when you make a change like that on a platform that many people have built applications on it will cause some commotion. Applications would now need to be open-sourced or buy a license. I think most people that are still here understand and accept that change because many of us purchased commercial licenses. Just read the original thread if you want to look back at peoples thoughts at the time.
    http://www.sencha.com/forum/showthre...License-Change


    Lets keep the discussion of the single license change in the other thread though. I can understand why you started a new thread, but it is probably best to prevent this discussion from becoming that one.

  3. #3
    Sencha Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    232
    Vote Rating
    140
    seade is a name known to all seade is a name known to all seade is a name known to all seade is a name known to all seade is a name known to all seade is a name known to all

      2  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by valio View Post
    I don't see the issue there.
    The basic premise of the GPL was that the code is kept free (copyleft) for everyone.
    I would be interested: what is your issue with the code being GPL?
    Sencha offers one the choice of contributing your code either to the community or to "keep it" and in return contribute to the company who developed it, by licensing the product.

    The thing I hate about the licensing at Sencha is the Sencha license itself which (theoretically) prohibits double licensing code that one had originally developed oneself as GPL code. And of course the very stupid move to get rid of single developer licenses (which will stiffen innovation for certain and could likely accelerate the extinction of ExtJS).
    Licensing is a complex subject. Ext JS is a framework. If you want people to adopt a framework you license it in such a way that people can use it any way they like, including in closed source projects. The GPL does not allow for this, it requires that you open source whatever you touch with the framework.

    The LGPL does not have this feature, you do not need to open source all of your code, just the code you write to fix or enhance the framework.

    For a framework to switch from LGPL to dual GPL/Commercial (as happened with Ext JS) could be seen as a bait and switch move. You are merrily working along under LGPL and suddenly, to move to any future release of the framework you need to either open source your code under the GPL or start paying for the commercial license. The thing that makes that pill hard to swallow is when you were already paying maintenance and support so as to help the framework grow and thrive.

    But all that is very old history now, as Tim said, go read that thread if you are interested. The current issue is quite different, though again comes down to trust.

  4. #4
    Sencha Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    40
    Vote Rating
    72
    iamright is infamous around these parts iamright is infamous around these parts

      -10  

    Default


    You're just becoming a troll now. Spreading quotes around from other threads? That's lame dude.