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

[Christian Mayer]

Hi PSC,

I've just seen that #155 [1] has been merged, which publishes the infos
about GeoExt's new dual licensing model. Shouldn't we publish a text
exceprt of the agreement with Sencha? As far as I can tell Marc has an
email with the agreement.
What do you think?

Cheers,
Chris

[1] https://github.com/geoext/geoext3/pull/155

--
Christian Mayer
GIS-Spezialist & Software-Developer

meggsimum
Hauptstraße 165a   | 67125 Dannstadt-Schauernheim
chris at meggsimum.de | www.meggsimum.de

Am 25.04.2016 um 17:44 schrieb Julien-Samuel Lacroix:
> Hi,
>
> Opened #154
> You've seens it already! :)
>
> Julien
>
> On 16-04-25 04:48 AM, Marc Jansen wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> is somebody actually doing sth. here?
>>
>> I think it might be easier to just open an issue / PR where committers
>> need to agree on the license change.
>>
>> We need someone to take care of this so we can settle this issue, IMO.
>>
>> Cheers, Marc
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20/04/16 15:51, Marc Jansen wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> thanks for taking this on.
>>>
>>> On 20/04/16 15:35, Christian Mayer wrote:
>>>> Hi Julien,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for providing this text block. Sounds good to me. The license change from
>>>> BSD to GPL has been made here [1]. The term "Commercial License" seems to be
>>>> correct as you can see here [2]. Maybe we include the link to Sencha's legal
>>>> page ([2]) as well to be clear.
>>>>
>>>> So, for me the procedure of sending an email to the dev-list sounds to be a
>>>> reasonable next step.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://github.com/geoext/geoext3/pull/16
>>>> [2] https://www.sencha.com/legal/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Julien-Samuel Lacroix <jlacroix at mapgears.com> hat am 20. April 2016 um 14:46
>>>>> geschrieben:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Psc mailing list
>> Psc at geoext.org
>> http://www.geoext.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/psc
>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.geoext.org/pipermail/psc/attachments/20160429/2e4d5ee0/attachment.htm