1. #501
    Sencha - Community Support Team jsakalos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Slovakia
    Posts
    27,521
    Vote Rating
    375
    jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future jsakalos has a brilliant future

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by mankz View Post
    Quick question:

    I bought an Ext license today, I'm using it to develop an intranet application for my client. Can I or can I not use UX's in my app (currently I'm using a few of Jsakalos great work)? If not, why?

    Thanks for a fantastic library!
    You can use them as far as I personally am concerned; my plugins are LGPL. From the plugins license viewpoint you just cannot use them if they become a part of another library or toolkit. If they are part of application I do not see any problem.

    Nevertheless, I don't know what other legal consequences this combination might have; the above is only my opinion as the author of my extensions and plugins.
    Jozef Sakalos, aka Saki

    Education, extensions and services for developers at new http://extjs.eu
    News: Grid Search Plugin, ExtJS 5 Complex Data Binding using MVVM

    -->

  2. #502
    Sencha User
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    240
    Vote Rating
    0
    OutpostMM is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    I respect Jack and his team a lot.

    But are you sure he/they "did" extjs from scratch ?
    I never claimed that they did. But what they have done with Ext is clearly an achievment that no other team has been as successful doing.

    No, that's not a crummy thing to do at all, actually. It's one of the many beauties of the open source community. If you think you can take something that already exists and make it into something better than where you think it's going, you have that freedom.
    Right, I appreciate the concept of forking in general. But the Ext fork was not created because the people forking it think that they can make it better. They are only trying to get around the licensing restrictions that come with the GPL. I don't like the merits of that. I don't know what Jack's original intentions were, but I see Ext almost like a commercial product that just so happens to also include an open-source license for hobbyists and such. I don't see it as an open-source, community-driven project that also happens to have a commercial license (which is more the way that I see MySQL). I don't agree with someone forking the product because they essentially disagree with the GPL, it looks like the goal of the Ext fork is to duplicate the functionality of Ext with a different license, not to improve on Ext. I don't agree with that in principle.
    -->

  3. #503
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    14
    Vote Rating
    0
    Dig is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by OutpostMM View Post
    I never claimed that they did. But what they have done with Ext is clearly an achievment that no other team has been as successful doing.
    Fair enough, how much is that a result of having a 35,000+ member community and don't they deserve to at least be consulted before such a big change?

    I don't count myself as a member of the community, I made a few things with extjs at the end of last year and came back to evaluate the latest version in a new, bigger project. Came back just in time to see this debate kick off, open source licensing be misunderstood by many community members and the Ext core development team and have the licensing email ignore me for so long I spent my money elsewhere. I find this debate incredibly distracting though and it has implications for my business and lessons to be learned for my own (true) open source projects.


    Quote Originally Posted by OutpostMM View Post
    Right, I appreciate the concept of forking in general. But the Ext fork was not created because the people forking it think that they can make it better. They are only trying to get around the licensing restrictions that come with the GPL. I don't like the merits of that. I don't know what Jack's original intentions were, but I see Ext almost like a commercial product that just so happens to also include an open-source license for hobbyists and such. I don't see it as an open-source, community-driven project that also happens to have a commercial license (which is more the way that I see MySQL). I don't agree with someone forking the product because they essentially disagree with the GPL, it looks like the goal of the Ext fork is to duplicate the functionality of Ext with a different license, not to improve on Ext. I don't agree with that in principle.
    I don't think *legally* there is any difference between an open source project with a commercial license and a commercial project with an open source license. Under the GPL and LGPL an open source project cannot have a condition such as 'it's only open source if you are a hobbyist' or 'its only open source if you do things they way we want'. Either its licensed under these terms (L)GPL or it isn't.

    While the fork(s) are no doubt appearing now to get around the license, that's a way of making Ext better in many people's eyes. Again if you give people freedom to use modify and distribute your product you can't tell them not to modify and distribute it unless you are specifically making the code better.

    I'd be able to fork 2.1 rename it My-js and sell it to people for $50,000 per license without making anything better. Look at what people do with OpenOffice.org there are three different boxed versions at my local computer shop, all essentially OOo ranging from $10 - $250.

    I digress, I've given up on Ext-js for the time being not because I don't want to pay for it, but because a community backlash against a unilateral license change is bad. It brings up copyright concerns Ext haven't addressed yet (to me, via email) and takes a lot away from what makes this an attractive prospect from my point of view. I'll see what happens with version 3.0
    -->

  4. #504
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    12
    Vote Rating
    0
    pavera is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default Does it really matter?

    Does it really matter?


    This whole thing has made me go and read the GLP v3 way more times than I ever wanted to... lol

    Here are my feelings. If saying <script src="ext.js" type="text/javascript" /> and then making function calls against ext.js causes my entire project to become GPL... then why doesn't typing #include kernel.h and making kernel calls make Oracle, or any other proprietary program that runs under linux, or for that matter the proprietary drivers, they all #include kernel.h, why aren't they *required* to be GPL'd? This is exactly the same thing.

    Further, there is a huge question in this case about conveying and propogating in my opinion. On the internet, the ext code is executed in the browser on the client machine. Therefore, I would contend that the "covered work" would constitute the ext js routines, the html, css, and images that combined form the "program" which is executing at the client. This is all source code, and is distributed as such, therefore, however you generated that combination of HTML, CSS, and Ext would be irrelevant to the question. If you compile a GPL'd program with MS Visual Studio, visual studio does not become GPL'd. Likewise if you compile a web page using a proprietary piece of software, and that web page contains GPL'd code, and is therefore GPL'd, the proprietary compiling software does not become GPL'd.

    Maybe I'm stretching a bit, but think about it for a minute. The program is executing on the client machine, think of the browser as the machine, whatever backend process you run to generate machine readable code (to the browser, HTML, CSS, and Javascript are the machine readable code), that process is not subject to the license of the machine readable code. Otherwise you could only use open source compilers to compile open source programs. It just so happens that in the case of HTML, CSS, and Javascript, the machine readable code is also the source code, so by distributing one you are distributing the other.

    Slightly murking up the waters is the fact that the GPL specifically states that "Mere interaction with a user through a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not conveying." I would argue any web application falls under this clause. Although I don't know what the creators of GPLv3 intended this clause to cover. If I were in a court arguing this case, I would start with this argument. I would say "I am not conveying a copy, and therefore, the conveyance clauses are not applicable. Because I am not conveying the program, I am not required to distribute the source code". It appears to me as though the GPL only comes into effect upon conveyance, there is no requirement upon any recipient of GPL'd code to distribute that code in any form if they are simply running the code. Even if you make modifications to a GPL'd program, as long as you are not distributing (in the license they use the term conveying) that program, you need not make your modifications available. Hence, if a webapp falls under "mere interaction with a user through a computer network", then a web app does not create a conveyance of the program, and as such, does not require the release of the source code of the webapp.

    If that argument failed, I would fall back to "I am distributing the source code, the HTML, CSS, and Javascript constitute the source code of this product".

    Last but not least, I really only see this move hurting Ext's adoption. There are quite a few JS libraries out there. My team builds web sites for small companies. Why would we ever use a framework that says to our customers "Oh yeah, we can do this, but then your website will be open sourced"?!? What does it gain Ext, or the open source community at large, to have hundreds or millions of one off database driven websites open sourced? What about the huge CMS's that are GPL'd? Joomla for example is GPL'd, I can and have developed great COMMERCIAL web sites using Joomla. Does Joomla maintain that this new website is GPL'd?!? I don't think so. Further, there are COMMERCIAL applications written that use Joomla as a framework. Joomla proudly lists and advertises these applications on their website. Simply importing and using a framework doesn't appear to "require that the new program be GPL'd" as is being maintained by Ext, LLC.

    IANAL, of course... but I really think this was a stupid move by Ext, and even if I could afford the $5k for the commercial license, I'd rather spend that money on developers and help improve dojo, prototype, scriptaculous or some other truly free framework.
    -->

  5. #505
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Karslruhe, Germany
    Posts
    44
    Vote Rating
    0
    PGTaboada is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Fully agree with pavera.

    IMHO the statement from the FSF member quoted by Darrel is nonsence:

    Not going to buy commercial license for POC (proof of concept) projects, no way. Would have needed premium support when getting a real project (after POC). Not getting there anymore, you are loosing potential customers.

    Oh yes, I could simply not tell anyone and use it for the POC. Sorry, GPL is a "no go" for most of my customers. Especially after reading your interpretation of GPL.

    My question is: was it worth it? I have serious doubts here.

    I hope I can get one or another customer to get a license. In the past I was building from trunk, answering questions in the forum, helping where I could. At least I was spreading the word, mentioning MyGWT and the JFace like API in an article for the Eclipse Magazine in Germany.

    This is over, I feel like the community is gone.

    just my 2 cents.
    -->

  6. #506
    Ext JS Premium Member dj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    573
    Vote Rating
    2
    dj has a spectacular aura about dj has a spectacular aura about dj has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default


    PGTaboada,

    commercial licenses are per developer - and Jack said, that will not change as long as he is in the company. YOU need a license. Not your customer per se. (only after you handed over the project and they want to change something in it). So if you do your POC project, all is fine, since you have a commercial license, don't you?


    And, I don't feel like 'the community is gone'. Some of the more prominent members of the community would certainly agree, if they had not stop reading this mega-thread after 100 posts or so


    pavera,

    re-read all post from Jack. Including Ext JS in a page does not mean, all your server-side code needs to be GPL'd. It depends on how you integrate it and how you are interacting with it. (only passing along generic data = JSON without xtype or stuff like that, is considered save by Jack).

    Ext JS is truly free. It is truly Open Source. As per the definition of FSF.
    ``Free software'' is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of ``free'' as in ``free speech,'' not as in ``free beer.''
    If you want free beer, you will not get it here.
    Daniel Jagszent
    dɐɳiel@ʝɐgszeɳt.de <- convert to plain ASCII to get my email address
    -->

  7. #507
    Ext User s.kerroumi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    33
    Vote Rating
    0
    s.kerroumi is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    i appreciate extjs and what jack and the ext team did is really fantastic...
    so all people in the "ex"-extjs community has to respect jack and extjs team...

    first extjs is not a project from scratch since it has been forked from YUI...

    Second extjs is not only the work of these people but it has been enhanced by community work like extensions, patches, debbugging...

    conclusion : the project is loosing trust of the community and will be forked by others people since we don't need ext official team to go on on the project...
    J2EE/Ajax
    -->

  8. #508
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Karslruhe, Germany
    Posts
    44
    Vote Rating
    0
    PGTaboada is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    @DJ

    I work as a consultant and even the POCs I am involved with are build by small teams at the customer. This is not unusual here in Germany.

    Regarding community, it's a matter of definition. What I see are customers - good for you. I sincerely do hope people continue contributing, although you are the ones cashing. Don't get me wrong. I'd love to pay for support, but not for the code. Not for community code. That's the point where our definition of community differ.

    Regarding GPL and our code: did you lose you mind? Did you really ask us to use JSON instead of GWT-RPC??? Did you understand the benefits of GWT, deferred binding, generators? GWT creates the best RPC possible for my classes, why should I do it by hand? GWT is more than just generating JS, is more than your lib.

    And, if you re-read pavera's posting, you will see that it is not about getting free beer. It's about misuse and misunderstanding of GPL. Getting payed is OK, no prob. Stretching GPL to your needs is not OK. Bitching pavera by statements like yours is a bad attitude. Paveras posting is serious. He took the time to explain what and why - is "If you want free beer, you will not get it here." all you have to say to his posting? Is this how you treat community members, when they raise issues? See, this is another point where our definition of community differs.

    Free speech is fine. Hope you can do better.
    -->

  9. #509
    Ext JS Premium Member dj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    573
    Vote Rating
    2
    dj has a spectacular aura about dj has a spectacular aura about dj has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default


    s.kerroumi,

    1. Ext was not forked from YUI. It started as an extension to YUI. Now it can be used as an extension to YUI, jQuery and Prototype+Scriptacolous.

    2. Ext, LLC owns all copyrights for Ext JS. (AFAIK except some minor parts which were under BSD license)

    Don't speak for 'the community' - speak for yourself. Ext, LLC has lost your trust. It has not lost mine. In fact, my trust in Ext, LLC has grown since it became a true supporter of Open Source software.
    Daniel Jagszent
    dɐɳiel@ʝɐgszeɳt.de <- convert to plain ASCII to get my email address
    -->

  10. #510
    Ext User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Karslruhe, Germany
    Posts
    44
    Vote Rating
    0
    PGTaboada is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by fernandoferreira View Post
    I don't understand why people are considering Ext JS moving from LGPL to GPL a "restriction" instead of an increase on freedom. The source code continues as free (as in speech) as it was before. The only thing the developers are asking is that, if you want to give to your users less rights than the Ext Dev team gives to you, you must to acquire a license. Quid pro quo. That's it, it is explicit in the license now. I'm ok to give my code to my customer, but not to his users! This is not GPL!

    In my opinion, it is a sound business model, the software is Free to anyone intending to preserve this freedom and pass it along. If I understood the complaints well, people don't like GPL because they want the ability to take the code from the Ext team and contributors, but not to share their own. You can do it people, but it has a cost now, and it is not even that high.
    So far I would agree. The GPL understanding used here is that, if someone uses my application that uses GXT to be build, this person must have access to the source. And this is IMHO bending/ stretching GPL too much. Users of the webapp do not get the binary, they use a service.
    The funny thing is, that EXT is planning FLOSS exceptions. For those making extensions/ themes/ etc. This is odd. I thought GPL to protect me from those proprietary changes - so I get the code so I can make changes if I need. But here it is completely the way arround!!!
    -->

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)
Turkiyenin en sevilen filmlerinin yer aldigi xnxx internet sitemiz olan ve porn sex tarzi bir site olan mobil porno izle 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 porno izle siteleri olmamasidir. Bu yuzden iste. Ayrica en net goruntu kalitesine sahip adresinde yayinlanmaktadir. Mesela diğer sitelerimizden bahsedecek olursak, en iyi hd porno video arşivine sahip bir siteyiz. "The Best anal porn videos and slut anus, big asses movies set..." hd porno faketaxi