[Psc] Finally: New licensing option for GeoExt3 (ツ)

[Julien-Samuel Lacroix]

I think the first step will be anounce our intention on the dev list and 
get a written (by email) acceptance from all committers. Tentative email:

<text>
Hello,

The GeoExt PSC has been actively discussing with Sencha about the ExtJS 
licensing change that prevented us to use GeoExt with a commercial ExtJS 
license. The change made in version X forced us to switch from a BSD 
licence to GPL preventing GeoExt to be used with a Commercial ExtJS.

After several months we are really pleased to announced an agreement 
from Sencha to Dual-Licence GeoExt 3. Users of GeoExt 3 will be able to 
get it under GPLv3 or, if they own an ExtJS commercial licence, use it 
under a BSD licence.

To be able to proceed with this licence change we require a written 
agreement from every code contributors:

  - marcjansen
  - KaiVolland
  - bentrm
  - weskamm
  - chrismayer
  - bartvde
  - jgrocha
  - patryksosinski
  - dnlkoch

Best regards,
The GeoExt PSC team

</text>

I did not find the right term for "ExtJS commercial licence". I'm sure 
it has a name, but could not find it.

Please let me know what you think, feel free to correct and send it if 
you agree.

Julien

On 16-04-20 06:02 AM, Christian Mayer wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> any ideas or plans how we proceed on this?
>
> Thanks and cheers,
> Chris
>
>
>> Julien-Samuel Lacroix <jlacroix at mapgears.com> hat am 6. April 2016 um 14:50
>> geschrieben:
>>
>>
>>
>>>    * Decide on whether we want to be dual licensed as outlined above (A
>>>      simple +1, 0, -1 vote of the PSC in response to this mail would be
>>>      enough, I guess)
>>
>> Thank you very much for this! I'm +1 big time on dual licensing.
>>
>>>    * Decide which other license suits our need. Since Apache was brought
>>>      up by Sencha, I'd be willing to take that one
>>
>> I'm fine either way.
>>
>>>    * Discuss the wording of how we document the licensing everywhere
>>>      (Sencha and I have talked this through but in the end we decide and
>>>      simply make it totally cklear to our users)
>>>    * Provide PR that actually does the change
>>>        o We should make it absolutely clear what the options are (see above)
>>>        o We should document this at several places
>>>            + LICENSE.md at the repository root
>>>            + LICENSE-FAQ.md at the repository root
>>>            + every source-file header
>>>            + on the homepage
>>>            + some other place?
>>
>> I like the idea of adding a LICENCE-FAQ.md. I think I would also provide
>> 2 download links:
>>     - GeoExt FOSS version: click here
>>     - If you own an ExtJS Commercial Licence: Click here
>>     - See FAQ for details
>>
>>>    * Do we need to get the appreciation of all actual committers again?
>>
>> I think that for any license change we do need a confirmation of all
>> actual contributor since they technically "own" the code.
>>
>> Julien
>>
>> --
>> Julien-Samuel Lacroix
>> T: +1 418-696-5056 #202
>> Mapgears
>> http://www.mapgears.com/
>> _______________________________________________
>> Psc mailing list
>> Psc at geoext.org
>> http://www.geoext.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/psc
> _______________________________________________
> Psc mailing list
> Psc at geoext.org
> http://www.geoext.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/psc
>

-- 
Julien-Samuel Lacroix
T: +1 418-696-5056 #202
Mapgears
http://www.mapgears.com/