Right. Having read the terms on their website. It is dual licensed. If you are distributing it in a commercial application then you have to purchase a license. That's basically the gist of it. If the application is open source then it must be compatible with GPLv3.
So I'm wanting to use it in a commercial application, therefore I must purchase a license. ... Which I'm thinking now I will do. I'm a commercial application developer, I see no reason they can't be as well. It does seem to be the best from what I've seen so far. Thanks all for suggestions. In particular the 'build it first in straight html and extend from there'. I think this is a good methodology, since not all browsers will support a JS interface. On 26/02/2009, at 9:32 PM, Adam Salter wrote: > IANAL, but... > For example, the linux kernel is GPL, but you can build proprietary > intefaces that use the kernel. > Any modifications to the kernel have to be released, but the stuff > you put on top (other libs/binaries etc) don't.... As I understand it. > This is how Nvidia and others can release closed source graphics > drivers.... > They have a LGPL interface which just passes the data on to their > driver. > > In this case ExtJS is open source, and, since I've very careful to > make no direct modifications to the ExtJS source (just drop it in > public/) I might have to release the javascript that loads and > executes with ExtJS (which is visible in the browser anyway). But no > way do I have to release the source of the rails app itself. > > I mean I could be using external data sources on another server (ie > Yahoo, S3) which would imply they would have to release their source > as well. Which is ridiculous. > > ... As I understand it. > > If not then, well I guess I can't use it... Haven't gone that far > yet... > > SmartClient certainly looks good. Plenty of history (7 years). > > On 26/02/2009, at 1:47 PM, Kunzmann wrote: > >> >> Hey Adam, >> >> We're using SmartClient here. We looked into ExtJS, as well, but, as >> others have already pointed out, the licensing isn't ideal. We've >> been >> pretty happy with SmartClient so far. >> >> Cheers, >> Kunzmann >> >> On Feb 25, 7:26 pm, Adam Salter <adam.q.sal...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hey all, >>> Ummm I'm doing an admin interface for a site atm... >>> Basic resizable columns and paging interface for searching and >>> adding >>> new items for various models etc. >>> >>> Here's how I've progressed. >>> Started in active_scaffold, but it's too... inflexible and doesn't >>> look good enough. Good way to get a quick scaffold though. >>> I've just finished doing the admin interface in Dojo, but just now >>> found ExtJS and liking the feel of it way better. >>> I've looked at YUI as well and discarded it as not quite my style... >>> >>> I'm just wondering what other peoples impressions are? >>> >>> I think I'm going to redo the interface in ExtJS 2.0 now since it's >>> just more flexible... and looks great. >>> >>> Dojo has some nice REST data interfaces, but I think I can replicate >>> them manually in ExtJS, other than that ExtJS seems to be the best >>> option so far. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> -Adam >> >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group. To post to this group, send email to rails-oceania@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rails-oceania+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
