22 Apr 2008 5:31 PM #241
I would be willing to fund/host a fork if users were interested.
PM me for details.
22 Apr 2008 6:17 PM #242
I also thought about a fork, but it's not that easy. Even if we do find a way to bypass the 2.0.2 license restrictions, there is the problem that the "Assets" (images and CSS) for Ext are under a separate license that prevents derivative works:
License of CSS and Graphics ("Assets")
The Assets distributed with Ext are licensed for use ONLY
any way that does not also include the Component is prohibited without explicit
permission from Ext JS, LLC. Deriving images and CSS from the Assets in an effort
to bypass this license is also prohibited.-->
22 Apr 2008 6:53 PM #243
At this point a fork to 2.0.2 seems inevitable as future bug fixes to Ext means upgrading to newer version which is GPL'ed.
Question is when.-->
22 Apr 2008 7:35 PM #244
ExtJS management still has to make an official statement with regards to the inquiries of the community.
If the restrictions remain, then forking is a good option. Although not an easy one. Count me and my company in.-->
22 Apr 2008 8:45 PM #245
The "Assets" can be used in a fork (they are still being used in the same components essentially
Community members have been breaching this clause if they used the Ext CSS and images in their own new components.-->
22 Apr 2008 9:00 PM #246
IANAL, but one point I think needs clearing up is the (ir)relevance of whether or not you are using ExtJS for commercial purposes in regards to your choice of the open-source vs. commercial license.
LICENSE.TXT in both 2.0.2 and 2.1 only say that you are encouraged to purchase a commercial license if you use ExtJS for commercial purposes (almost universally the participants in this thread would encourage you to do so too, myself included).
With the exception of OEM/Resellers who get a special section of their own in LICENSE.TXT, you appear to be completely free to choose whether you want to use the open-source license or not (LGPL in 2.0.2 or GPL in 2.1). You obviously have to comply with the relevant LGPL/GPL in that case, but the ability to actually use an open-source license is not based on whether you are using ExtJS for commercial purposes or not (as has been suggested several times in this thread).
This was explicit in 2.0.2 LICENCE.TXT - the third dot-point under "You may use our open source license if you.." states:
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
This is no longer listed explicitly in 2.1 LICENSE.TXT, however the dot-point list is now described as: "You may wish to use our open source license if you..." which doesn't look anything like a legal requirement to me (again IANAL).
Full support to Jack and the team. The sky doesn't appear to be falling in from where I'm standing, just more information and anti-FUD needed.-->
22 Apr 2008 9:21 PM #247-->
22 Apr 2008 11:15 PM #248
a licence again...
a licence again...
The vast majority of the icons are public domain, and the vast majority if the css are inspired by vista (aero, black, etc.). What is the licensing on that ?
And a fork would even not break the licensing on the styles/icons because the files would still be available within the 2.0.2 Ext components only.
22 Apr 2008 11:28 PM #249-->
23 Apr 2008 12:34 AM #250
I simply want to share my opinion about this License Change issue:
- First of all, I want to say that ExtJS is really cutting-edge JS framework that runs very fast in almost A-Grade browser, out-of-the-box programming model, with profesional look & feel results. I also do quite extensive research for JS framework and NO ONE can compare with ExtJS (in terms of easy to use, active forums and supports, keep enhancing the features, etc..)
- So for the last 3 months I begin to intensively to learn and try to implement it for my company's project. And yesterday I see that ext 2.1 was released. But when I open the LICENSE.TXT. I really shock that ExtJS team change it's licensing scheme, and I begin to hesitate, should I continue using this framework or not.
- Then I look another perspective, why don't I purchase the license. 1 Developer = $289. Not very expensive (I think my boss will think the same too). But before I propose to my boss to purchase, I need some information such as:
- - where is ExtJS LLC's office?
- - how can I contact, by phone, email?
- I feel cheated, for I waste the last 3 months to learn, and I have to drop it because of license change.
- For the license change issue itself, it seems that ExtJS do not have solid commitment of License Scheme that will be change so easily from one scheme to another scheme. For now 1 developer for unlimited server/domain, but one day in the future (maybe) 1 developer for 1 domain only.
- No other contact method, only email, is one of my boss' reason not to use ExtJS.
- If I force my boss to use ExtJS ver 2.0.2, I can't guarantee that it will also support newer browser such as FF 3.0 and IE 8.0 and this is also dead end too.
Cheers to all.-->