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

[Marc Jansen]

On 29.04.2016 10:31, Christian Mayer wrote:
> 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?

Fully agreed. It's on my list!

>
> 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
>>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160429/27a4fb71/attachment-0001.htm