1. #101
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rothschild, WI
    Posts
    46
    Vote Rating
    0
    ziesemer is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Again, I really wonder if many people are missing the point here.

    Please refer back to my original post on this thread, #72, which has since been referenced by #89.

    Unless someone can reference proof to the otherwise, I believe that the only restriction GPL has over LGPL is if you are looking to provide something using Ext as a product rather than a service.


    Using Ext on a hosted web site, either on the public Internet or a private Intranet - no additional requirements.
    Taking that same application and making it available for others ("run this on your web site"), then your software must also be GPL, or the commercial license must be chosen.

    (Ext team: This thread appears to be a run-away train. It'd be very helpful if you could create and post a FAQ based on the questions and assumptions from within this thread.)
    -->

  2. #102
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    190
    Vote Rating
    0
    esoteric is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    @ziesemer, I have read the GPL a couple times (unfortunately), however you understanding is incorrect based on my understanding and what I have read, any type of application, website, service, or otherwise that uses a GPL'd product, must then be also GPL'd. Its the viral nature of the GPL.

    The GPL fact states that if you use something that is GPL'd internally (not available for the public to use or see) then you don't have to release your "product" under the GPL, but it is is release to the public in any fashion it must then be released under the GPL.
    -->

  3. #103
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rothschild, WI
    Posts
    46
    Vote Rating
    0
    ziesemer is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    @esoteric, etc.:

    Please reference http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#UnreleasedMods:

    A company is running a modified version of a GPL'ed program on a web site. Does the GPL say they must release their modified sources?

    The GPL permits anyone to make a modified version and use it without ever distributing it to others. What this company is doing is a special case of that. Therefore, the company does not have to release the modified sources.
    Now, it seems that what most everyone is worried about here would actually be concerns of the Affero GPL (AGPL) license, not the regular GPL license.
    Last edited by ziesemer; 22 Apr 2008 at 4:12 AM. Reason: Referencing AGPL
    -->

  4. #104
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    190
    Vote Rating
    0
    esoteric is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    @ziesemer, I am not trying to be rude, but again you like many others don't read the entire part. It goes on to say:

    It is essential for people to have the freedom to make modifications and use them privately, without ever publishing those modifications. However, putting the program on a server machine for the public to talk to is hardly “private” use, so it would be legitimate to require release of the source code in that special case. Developers who wish to address this might want to use the GNU Affero GPL for programs designed for network server use.
    And also, you technically aren't using a modified version of Ext, unless you are actually going into the code and modifying it, which I highly doubt, this doesn't pertain either.
    -->

  5. #105
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    15
    Vote Rating
    0
    acharis is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by esoteric View Post
    Ext is also licensed under the terms of the Open Source LGPL 3.0 license. This needs to be clarified, because it is being taken out of context. If you continue to read it states that you can use Ext under this license if you agree two one of three terms.

    With that said I am unhappy with this decision to move to GPL, but you have to read the entire license with 2.0.2. Again beacuse of the stipulations you CANNOT fork.

    @dezo33 - You need a license per developer, not per customer. So if you are going to develop something and use it to make money, you need a commercial license. If you are going to develop something and give it for free, then you can use the OS license path.

    Thats all for now.
    I don't mind no forking. I don't mind that what ever I can think of that can help the community is shared back, they have my full support on that. It just means that technology is pooled from all walks of life concentrated into one base.

    In my country however some of the clients will not be willing to share code back specially since it would provide business intellectual property. However those codes may be renderered through ExtJS forms through the wire in which GPL will infect.

    Can you please point me to the web reference of the documentation that states the LGPL license for ExtJS?

    Hmm there's hope...
    -->

  6. #106
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    190
    Vote Rating
    0
    esoteric is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    @acharis, this only applies to Ext 2.0.2 and lower for LGPL and you can only use LGPL as a license if you agree to one of the following terms:
    * Want to use Ext in an open source project that precludes using non-open source software
    * Plan to use Ext in a personal, educational or non-profit manner
    * Are using Ext in a commercial application that is not a software development library
    or toolkit, you will meet LGPL requirements and you do not wish to support the project.
    -->

  7. #107
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    22
    Vote Rating
    0
    dezo33 is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by dezo33 View Post
    Now, as IANAL, tell me this:

    1.) I develop an application for my company using GPLed Ext
    2.) I do not buy any license
    3.) I "sell logins", the right to use my application to my customers
    4.) I don't give them the application source code

    Now:

    1.) Do I violate GPL?
    2.) If yes, what do I have to buy?
    3.) For how much?
    4.) One customer = one Ext license?
    5.) Does buying a license free me from publishing code of my application to customers?
    6.) What if I decide to install my application on servers of customers for their internal use?



    My opinion: Bad move. Watch the growth of community carefully. Stalled? No wonder.

    I'm voting for re-considering the decision and stick with LGPL.
    Ignored? Are these questions too complicated? Could an Ext Sales Manager or Ext Lawyer answer? Or you're not interested in potential new users/payees? I could be one of them...
    @dezo33 - You need a license per developer, not per customer. So if you are going to develop something and use it to make money, you need a commercial license. If you are going to develop something and give it for free, then you can use the OS license path.
    This would partially answer questions 1-4, however, with all respects to you as good, knowledgeable and responsible person, I cannot take this answer because it is not the answer form Ext Officials.

    I'm still missing answers to remaining questions, including for how long Ext guarantees that answers it gives now will stay in force - I'm developing applications that may be around for next 20-30 years.
    -->

  8. #108
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    22
    Vote Rating
    0
    dezo33 is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    One more: OK, per developer. If the developer leaves the company. What now? Buy another? How often? Every year?
    -->

  9. #109
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    190
    Vote Rating
    0
    esoteric is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Wow 20-30 years, whats your secret. j/k. I hope that works out for you. In respects to open source licensing, you generally cannot reverse a decision on a release already out. However you can change it future release or future downloads of a release theoretically that is. I haven't seen anyone every try this.

    As for you second statement, that is a little confusing, and if you really need answers, emailing the licensing department of Ext would be better then posting their response, there is only a few of them and they don't have time to peruse the thousands of posts each day in depth cause they are working on Ext.

    Allows for a single developer to install and use Ext JS on unlimited workstations for development and to deploy Ext JS on unlimited domains and sub-domains on unlimited servers.
    If the developer leaves oh well, if your company purchases the license for one of your developers to use cool, if he leaves then you allow another developer to use the license, then again this is how I understand it and I am not an official representative.
    -->

  10. #110
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    22
    Vote Rating
    0
    dezo33 is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by esoteric View Post
    ... if you really need answers, emailing the licensing department of Ext would be better then posting their response, there is only a few of them and they don't have time to peruse the thousands of posts each day in depth cause they are working on Ext.
    Yes, I could email. Reason I'm asking here is to save Ext team time because if they answered on the forum they wouldn't need to handle thousands of e-mails with same questions.

    Or, am I alone with my questions?
    -->

Thread Participants: 176

  1. jack.slocum (31 Posts)
  2. JeffHowden (6 Posts)
  3. TommyMaintz (5 Posts)
  4. kellysz (2 Posts)
  5. tryanDLS (2 Posts)
  6. christocracy (9 Posts)
  7. jay@moduscreate.com (9 Posts)
  8. vtswingkid (1 Post)
  9. willgillen (2 Posts)
  10. yogurtearl (1 Post)
  11. buzz (1 Post)
  12. bidyut (1 Post)
  13. jason (1 Post)
  14. adrian.tarau (14 Posts)
  15. tbenbrahim (3 Posts)
  16. vmorale4 (13 Posts)
  17. tierneyja (2 Posts)
  18. DaNCeT (1 Post)
  19. Preston (2 Posts)
  20. stever (1 Post)
  21. PuritysDisciple (1 Post)
  22. stucco (3 Posts)
  23. Jul (1 Post)
  24. dj (13 Posts)
  25. ReyBango (1 Post)
  26. dolittle (1 Post)
  27. mystix (5 Posts)
  28. stekolla (1 Post)
  29. JoeK (2 Posts)
  30. albeva (1 Post)
  31. bloudon (2 Posts)
  32. shanebush (2 Posts)
  33. dantheman (21 Posts)
  34. mberkay (1 Post)
  35. jheid (3 Posts)
  36. jsakalos (1 Post)
  37. rashadmoore (1 Post)
  38. bitdifferent (1 Post)
  39. FlexIDX (15 Posts)
  40. kpandey (1 Post)
  41. acharis (5 Posts)
  42. pabs (8 Posts)
  43. DigitalSkyline (12 Posts)
  44. Darklight (2 Posts)
  45. evant (8 Posts)
  46. Illiarian (2 Posts)
  47. seymores (5 Posts)
  48. HartlepoolLad (4 Posts)
  49. Rowan (1 Post)
  50. jexxi (1 Post)
  51. J.C. Bize (4 Posts)
  52. mschering (1 Post)
  53. antimatter15 (2 Posts)
  54. kris (2 Posts)
  55. mdm-adph (1 Post)
  56. patspam (7 Posts)
  57. ethraza (3 Posts)
  58. Tim Siney (4 Posts)
  59. majorpay (22 Posts)
  60. niemeyer (1 Post)
  61. crafter (4 Posts)
  62. Chris in Cambridge (3 Posts)
  63. ftftft (1 Post)
  64. FXetc (2 Posts)
  65. seade (9 Posts)
  66. esoteric (38 Posts)
  67. xtrafile (1 Post)
  68. esra (3 Posts)
  69. rednix (5 Posts)
  70. Zyclops (1 Post)
  71. pyrolupus (1 Post)
  72. hendricd (2 Posts)
  73. joeri (2 Posts)
  74. djfiii (6 Posts)
  75. kw (1 Post)
  76. mscdex (3 Posts)
  77. philmaker (1 Post)
  78. perler (2 Posts)
  79. DragonFist (1 Post)
  80. robinet (1 Post)
  81. sb32 (1 Post)
  82. ziesemer (24 Posts)
  83. ThorstenSuckow (8 Posts)
  84. jerrybrown5 (3 Posts)
  85. mykes (1 Post)
  86. Geoff (2 Posts)
  87. improva (3 Posts)
  88. Lloyd K (7 Posts)
  89. rtconner (1 Post)
  90. Lobos (13 Posts)
  91. durlabh (5 Posts)
  92. fernandoferreira (7 Posts)
  93. mabello (2 Posts)
  94. sigaref (1 Post)
  95. mankz (1 Post)
  96. random0xff (1 Post)
  97. ArSa (2 Posts)
  98. randygo (3 Posts)
  99. Rocco (2 Posts)
  100. jdupont092 (13 Posts)
  101. bear330 (1 Post)
  102. SeaSharp2 (6 Posts)
  103. Dig (9 Posts)
  104. hotnuts21 (1 Post)
  105. s.kerroumi (8 Posts)
  106. franck34 (1 Post)
  107. figital (1 Post)
  108. retrogradeorbit (1 Post)
  109. OutpostMM (21 Posts)
  110. SAnDAnGE (1 Post)
  111. Richo99 (8 Posts)
  112. irongaze (4 Posts)
  113. herrjj (1 Post)
  114. wrhighfield (3 Posts)
  115. xpurpur (1 Post)
  116. jaxl (1 Post)
  117. hardrock (4 Posts)
  118. Rich Kucera (2 Posts)
  119. ibrandt (2 Posts)
  120. rainydays (2 Posts)
  121. jergarmar (1 Post)
  122. fullej (1 Post)
  123. dotchris (7 Posts)
  124. benb (19 Posts)
  125. erictang (1 Post)
  126. enpasos (1 Post)
  127. dynqnet (6 Posts)
  128. sgodden (1 Post)
  129. Etienne Lacazedieu (1 Post)
  130. Arthur.Blake (5 Posts)
  131. MarcWeil (2 Posts)
  132. timsporcic (1 Post)
  133. j_johnso (2 Posts)
  134. asanjum (1 Post)
  135. BernieM (2 Posts)
  136. kekoav (4 Posts)
  137. ds (1 Post)
  138. NoahK17 (6 Posts)
  139. rule3 (8 Posts)
  140. zarembisty (6 Posts)
  141. gregphoto (1 Post)
  142. dezo33 (22 Posts)
  143. grom358 (15 Posts)
  144. lemonade (6 Posts)
  145. Martin Kraus (1 Post)
  146. raafoo (2 Posts)
  147. OSSCurious (1 Post)
  148. huherto (1 Post)
  149. Kutu (1 Post)
  150. jpnet (1 Post)
  151. LGPLman (2 Posts)
  152. mrsinister (1 Post)
  153. Insane.Kangaroo (17 Posts)
  154. outworlder (2 Posts)
  155. cherngje (4 Posts)
  156. lxmod (2 Posts)
  157. angbob (1 Post)
  158. scroisier (1 Post)
  159. scubajoe88 (2 Posts)
  160. pavera (12 Posts)
  161. PGTaboada (16 Posts)
  162. zaccret (4 Posts)
  163. Spoom (1 Post)
  164. markc (1 Post)
  165. ElGuapo (1 Post)
  166. ExtRocks (1 Post)
  167. blpiko (1 Post)
  168. Ext J$ (2 Posts)
  169. andrewroth (2 Posts)
  170. klyphio (1 Post)
  171. qbvbsite (4 Posts)
  172. NullDaddy (1 Post)
  173. deeep (1 Post)
  174. Chris503 (1 Post)
  175. superman2008 (1 Post)
  176. brian.moeskau (2 Posts)