I was angry about your decision…but i understand now.

Your work is invaluable Jack, you have done something very very special. It’s an absolutely outstanding framework, a great piece of software.

Without you Ext would not be possible.

Just remember the work of the community, by keeping on supporting them on the forums, and another thing: if you one day decide to drop this framework for some reason, please retain the paternity and revert it to LGPL license so that this work can be taken and developed by the community.

Wish the best.

Is it *legal* what you are doing? I mean, you have benefit for a long time of the help of many many people reporting bugs, creating tutorials, answering the forums and so on, all under the LGPL licence.

Now you want to sell the result of *their* work, along with yours.

What i’m trying to say is that this product can’t be *YOURS* after being under a LGPL for so long.

This project is not *YOURS* anymore! In my opinion this is not even legal!

We paid for a support contract on Ext with the understanding that we could distribute it as LGPL. Without this exception we will have to pull Ext functionality from the app.

We cannot switch licenses for our code at this point, and continuing to use a dead-end version of Ext is not attractive.

What is the timeframe for information on support for non-GPL open source applications?

And it makes the developers (project and external ones) work on the code base more seriuos.

For all those ranting here and there, most of the comments I was reading and the fear those (mostly bloggers) are facing are that they were not already aware of licensing. Most of the questions posed reveal general shortcomings in licensing knowledge.

The suggestion by Andrei Neculau to let the questions posed by deadcabbit on ajaxian do not hit the nail as well. Answering those questions might give a general view but licensing is bound to the concrete act of usage, and since there are a million possibilities, there must be some million questions asked and then answered. Therefore choosing a clear and well known license type does help a lot more and even people like deadcabbit or Andrei Neculau who pretend to be new to licensing. Extjs does inform about the licenses, you find the information here: http://www.extjs.com/company/dual.php

Then Max who fears to pay his lawyers, that aren’t cheap. Normally for licensing (any type) and more seriuos clients you mostly always need to contact your lawyers. But anyway, extjs makes your live much more cheaper with spending only little money for the commercial license. Just a scenario: Max re-licenses on LGPL to his customers but some court later on says that LGPL is defenetly not fitting for scripting languages. The LGPL then is lost as licensing for the code used and you are without license then. Since you are without license you were not able to re-license to your customers. Just a Scenario.

After the License Change things did infact got more simple and easier. Now with the FLOSS Exceptions drafted things become a little bit more complicated but I think these additional licensing terms do make live for people like Andrei Neculau and deadcabbit more easy because they get their questions clearly answered.

A little hint on the end: It is possible to license Images and such files shipped with extjs under GPL as well. GPL is not bound to sourcecode only.

I wish the project all the best and hope that the choice of license will help to evolve - on the codebase on commercially for the project.

Thanks!