[rules-dev] Licensing impact on BRMS 2.0 due to Ext JS library moving from LGPL to GPL?

[Mark Proctor]

Shahad Ahmed wrote:
> The front-end of the BRMS destined for Drools 5 appears to use the 
> GWT-EXT library, which in turn requires the Ext JS library. However, 
> one of my colleagues has pointed out that as of April 21st 2008, the 
> EXT JS library is now licensed under GPL (v3), whereas prior to this 
> it was licensed under LGPL.
>  
> I don't know too much about licensing, but isn't this going to have an 
> impact on the final Drools 5.0 licensing? From the little I know about 
> licensing, if you use a GPL library (ext-core.js etc in the BRMS) then 
> any derived code (e.g.. Drools) can only be distributed under GPL as 
> well, so Drools couldn't be distributed under Apache 2 anymore?
>  
> Its a bit bonkers of EXT JS to suddenly change a license from LGPL to 
> GPL and there is definitely a "heated" debate going on in the GWT-EXT 
> and other forums. I hope it's appropriate to post this on the dev 
> list, and apologies if not.
We are currently on 2.0.2, which does not require us to be GPL. Either 
way client side .js cannot infect server side code, so it wouldn't 
impact the main product. We are looking to see if we can continue on a 
lgpl fork.
>  
> Regards
> Shahad
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-dev/attachments/20080507/a39eedf4/attachment.html