Not only open source, but also free for enterprise applications! Extaspnet discards GPL V2 and embraces Apache license 2.0

ArticleDirectory

• Extjs open source license

Raise Questions

Extaspnet since open source, has always adhered to the principle of open source free, but its GPL v2 protocol also makes some developers feel embarrassed, for example, someone mentioned this problem: http://www.cnblogs.com/sanshi/archive/2012/02/05/2339242.html

 

To further clarify the principle that extaspnet is open-source and free (not only for individual developers, but also for enterprise commercial applications), we checked the extjs authorization protocol, compared with various open-source protocols, Apache license 2.0 is the final choice, which saves your business applications from worries.

 

Analyze problems 

First, let's look at the extjs authorization protocol:

Extjs open source license

Sencha is an avid supporter of open source software.Our open source license is the appropriate option if you are creating an open source application under a license compatible with the gnu gpl license V3.Although the gplv3 has initialize terms, the most important is that you must provide the source code of your application to your users so they can be free to modify your application for their own needs.

That is to say, open-source applications based on extjs can use open-source protocols compatible with GPL V3. After reading the relevant documents, we found many protocols that are friendly to commercial applications:

GNU lesser General Public License (lgpl) Version 3

This is the latest version of the lgpl: a free software license, but not a strong Copyleft license, because it permits linking with non-free modules. it is compatible with gplv3. we recommend it for special circumstances only.

Apache license, version 2.0

This is a free software license, compatible with version 3 of the GPL.

Modified BSD license

This is the original BSD license, modified by removal of the advertising clause. It is a simple, permissive non-Copyleft free software license, compatible with the gnu gpl.

Mozilla Public License (MPL) Version 2.0

This is a free software license. section 3.3 provides indirect compatibility between this license and the gnu gpl version 2.0, the GNU lgpl version 2.1, the GNU agpl version 3.0, and all later versions of those licenses.

 

Which one should I choose? There are some Chinese documents on the comparison of these protocols: Document 1 and document 2.

 

Among these protocols, I am familiar with Apache license 2.0, because many of our applications use Apache license 2.0, for example, HTTP server, tomcat, Maven, subversion, structs, and hadoop, let's take a look at its simple definition in Chinese:

Apache licence 2.0

Apache licence is a well-known non-profit open-source Apache protocol. Similar to BSD, this Protocol also encouragesCodeShare and respect the copyright of the original author, and allow code modification and re-release (as open-source or commercial software ). The conditions to be met are similar to those of BSD:

1. A copy of Apache licence is required for the code user.
2. If you have modified the code, it is described in the file to be modified.
3. In the extended code (modified andSource codeDerived code) must contain the agreement, trademark, patent statement in the original code and other instructions required by the original author.
4. If the published product contains a notice file, Apache licence must be included in the notice file. You can add your own license to notice, but it cannot be expressed as a change to Apache licence.

Apache licence is also a friendly license for commercial applications. Users can also modify the code as needed to meet their needs and release/sell as open-source or commercial products.

Which one should I choose? I can't decide for a moment.

 

Solve the problem

Later, an article I accidentally discovered (English version) strengthened my determination to use Apache license 2.0.

Let's take a look at this set of data:

Authorization protocols preferred for open-source developers:

1. GPL (1, 68.9%)
2. Apache licensing (7.6%)
3. lgpl (6.7%)
4. BSD license (5.3%)
5. MIT license (4.1%)

The most frequently downloaded open-source projects:

1. Apache licensing (32.7%)
2. lgpl (21.0%)
3. GPL (1, 14.4%)
4. BSD license (3.8%)
5. MIT license (1.6%)

The most used authorization protocol for enterprise applications

1. Apache licensing (15.3%)
2. MIT license (10.8%)
3. BSD license (10.5%)
4. GPL (1, 9.5%)
5. lgpl (8.9%)

 

It is clear that most of the application scenarios of extaspnet are enterprise management systems. Therefore, it is wise to choose the most used authorization protocol for enterprises, this comes with today's decision:

 

Starting from extaspnet v3.1.0, extaspnet will use Apache license 2.0, which is friendly to commercial applications.

Extaspnet authorization Protocol

 

 

 

Note:

1. The extaspnet authorization protocol is only applicable to extaspnet applications.ProgramItself.
2. Because extaspnet is an extjs-based application, if you use extaspnet in commercial applications, please purchase commercial license from extjs official.

 

Like extaspnet, come and join the official forum: http://bbs.extasp.net/