Doesn’t the license state the copyleft only comes in when you start editing core files? Surely that means you don’t need to do anything provided you don’t mess with the core.
OSL 3.0 requires that the External Deployment of software be treated the same as a distribution. The effect, of course, is that copies of the Original Work or Derivative Works that are externally deployed (i.e., that are used in-house to provide services to third parties) must be distributed reciprocally under OSL 3.0, just as if those third parties had received actual copies of the Original Work or Derivative Works.
http://rosenlaw.com/OSL3.0-explained.htm
You must provide the source code to the Original Work (ie. the unchanged files).
Yes, this license is ‘new’ for the CI community, but I think it can work for most of us. Ellislabs has expressed a willingness to consider custom licensing for those who need it. We could do worse; consider a Microsoft® license, the stuff of nightmares…
I agree!
The manner of providing the source code to our sites visitors is what a few of us are slightly concerned with, as it reveals the software we’re using as well as the specific version, and might as well be an “advertising clause” (the phrase that Derek dislikes), but really what else could it be? If I were going to use it (CI 3.0), I’d just link to the repo, but I would wish that I didn’t have to.
You must provide the source code to the Original Work (ie. the unchanged files).
No, you don’t.
As Derek already mentioned, the fact that the source code to the Original Work is already publicly available (published by Ellislab) is enough.
I guess you misunderstood me. I didn’t mean you must provide the source code as downloadable on your own site, but you must provide it somehow. One such way is by linking to the Github repo (which I mentioned in my previous post).
I think 95% of people won’t even bother reading the osl3 when they dl codeigniter, let alone adhere to it. It’s only large companies with legal teams that will bother, just like now. Most people probably think “open source” means they can just do what they want how they want. I doubt the majority of CI users have even read the current license.
I think 95% of people won’t even bother reading the osl3 when they dl codeigniter, let alone adhere to it. It’s only large companies with legal teams that will bother, just like now. Most people probably think “open source” means they can just do what they want how they want. I doubt the majority of CI users have even read the current license.
I believe this is accurate, and what’s too bad is that large companies, the 5%, with legal teams are the type of end user that will most likely not want to reveal the technology their website is running on, while the 95% of people who didn’t read the license would probably not have a problem linking back to the repo.
I don’t really care about the license in regards to my personal projects and distributions, and will gladly make the CI 3.0 source code available to everyone, but I think it is my customers, who pay my bills, that may not think the OSL 3.0 license terms are acceptable.
I was using CI pretty much years and thanks to all the developers for the great product. To be honest I can’t see any advantage for the community here… Probably disadvantages only! It is nice for all of us to use CI under the MIT license, it is very convenient and you don’t have to even bother. Here was pretty much good and bad comments related to OSL 3.0, but is it really better to have it? From my point of view I don’t think so, I can’t even see at least 1 reason for myself why this new license should be better.
Honestly this is a very serious change, the chane which hasn’t been done so far for other popular frameworks such like YII and others and this is really great. Strange why the community driven CodeIgniter is doing so, even if there is nothing useful for the community as the MIT license is already great, or let say the best… Please correct me if I am wrong.
It was really great for me so far to use really amazing CodeIgniter, however just because of changes like that, not really community driven changes, starting from version 3.0 I’ll belong to another community which is really thinking about all the users.
I was using CI pretty much years and thanks to all the developers for the great product. To be honest I can’t see any advantage for the community here… Probably disadvantages only! It is nice for all of us to use CI under the MIT license, it is very convenient and you don’t have to even bother. Here was pretty much good and bad comments related to OSL 3.0, but is it really better to have it? From my point of view I don’t think so, I can’t even see at least 1 reason for myself why this new license should be better.
Honestly this is a very serious change, the chane which hasn’t been done so far for other popular frameworks such like YII and others and this is really great. Strange why the community driven CodeIgniter is doing so, even if there is nothing useful for the community as the MIT license is already great, or let say the best… Please correct me if I am wrong.
It was really great for me so far to use really amazing CodeIgniter, however just because of changes like that, not really community driven changes, starting from version 3.0 I’ll belong to another community which is really thinking about all the users.
I think it is sad that the CI community will lose you. I think this is what EllisLab can expect from a notable percentage of developers, and many won’t say anything here in the forum. MIT or BSD is certainly better for developers, but I think EllisLab is looking after #1, and there’s nothing wrong with that. One thing that you might consider is what has been said in previous posts, which is that for some websites it will certainly do no harm to point your website visitors to the repo on github. For websites where this is not possible, you may elect to use an older version of CI, or contact EllisLab and purchase a commercial type license.
One thing that you might consider is what has been said in previous posts, which is that for some websites it will certainly do no harm to point your website visitors to the repo on github.
You are not obligated to actively point your individual website visitors anywhere; OSL 3.0 has no advertising clause. Attribution is only required in the source and other locations that the licensor clearly defines as such a notice. Please see the Agency example in this week’s post outlining examples of OSL 3.0 compliance.
Thank you Derek for posting that blog with examples of how to comply with OSL 3.0, it has really cleared up a lot for me. I was really bummed at the fact that I might have to drop CodeIgniter for future development because of my initial thoughts about the license and the debate that surrounds it.
Looking at other PHP frameworks really reminded me of how simple and nice, yet powerful CodeIgniter is. Thank you guys at EllisLab and the reactor team for making such a great framework!
Honestly this is a very serious change, the chane which hasn’t been done so far for other popular frameworks such like YII and others and this is really great. Strange why the community driven CodeIgniter is doing so, even if there is nothing useful for the community as the MIT license is already great, or let say the best… Please correct me if I am wrong.
The facts are
- CI is not community driven, but EllisLab driven.
- Nobody asked about the license change before EllisLab decided the change.
- No contributors have been asked about the change.
EllisLab loves OSL, because they would like for people to know that a work is based on CodeIgniter, and OSL is the best to the purpose.
The obligation of OSL to provide the source code makes people to know CodeIgniter. Other open source licenses do not force to do like that (at lease I don’t know such a license).
