HTML 5 Deployment

[Lagi Pittas]

Hi

I was under the impression the HTML5 deployment was free for the community and indy/business version of livecode.

Why then do I have a HTML5 deployment add £399.00 a year option in my account?

Regards Lagi

[FourthWorld]

It is included in the Community Edition.

[Lagi Pittas]

Hi Richard

So you mean I have paid for Indy and I have to pay for HTML5 which is free in community?
What is the logic pray tell.

My brain Hurts

Lagi

[FourthWorld]

LiveCode Community Edition is distributed under the GNU Public License v3. Works made with it also inherit the terms of that license. The GPL expresses no opinion about price; the "free" in "free software" is about the freedom to have access to, modify, and redistribute the program's source code.

If your goal is sharing software under terms that allow modification and require those modifications be under the same license when distributed, the GPL can be a very good choice.

If your interest is in delivering proprietary works in which the source code is not shared, the proprietary license of the Indy or Business editions would be a better fit.

[Klaus]

Hi Richard,

i am with Lagi here!

It would really make sense if Indy and Business license holder could ALSO export to HTML like the Community Edition,
but would need this extra HTML license to distribute "closed" HTML stuff, know what I mean?

It is ridiculous that one will need to manage 2 versions of LC to do so as a commercial license holder!


Best

Klaus

[Klaus]

...and reported as an Enhancement request: http://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=17866

[Lagi Pittas]

God is with me

[Klaus]

God is with me

Thank you, but just call me Klaus!

[FourthWorld]

It would really make sense if Indy and Business license holder could ALSO export to HTML like the Community Edition,
but would need this extra HTML license to distribute "closed" HTML stuff, know what I mean?

It is ridiculous that one will need to manage 2 versions of LC to do so as a commercial license holder!

The Community Edition is a very different thing from the proprietary editions. If you feel the value it delivers is so great, GPL and all, that it lowers the perceived value of the proprietary editions, the most logical business move would be to eliminate the open source edition.

Personally I hope that doesn't happen, but if people fixate on "free as in gratis" without appreciating the "free as in freedom" which truly distinguishes open source, perhaps an open source edition is not in the larger interests of the LiveCode project. Personally I feel it plays an important role, but to me it doesn't affect the perceived value of proprietary options. If it does for a large enough percentage of the user base perhaps it's not a good fit.

As for bundling HTML deployment with the other deployment options in the proprietary editions, would you feel it's fairer to simply bundle both together at the combined price? What about those who only want desktop and mobile?

LiveCode provides a high-level language with integrated GUI elements across a nearly unprecedented scope of platforms. I haven't seen another company even attempt to deliver the mix of things LC provides, and understandably so given the huge expense required.

How would you propose they cover the cost of delivering features like HTML deployment without supplementing the expense through licensing fees?

This is a difficult challenge for any company, more so for those with open source editions. Perhaps you may be able to come up with a business model that works very well for customers while also allowing the project to be sustainable.

[ClipArtGuy]

I think he's suggesting that the HTML deployment option from within indy/business should still be able to deploy HTML5 standalones as GPL if the licensee does not have a commercial HTML5 license, instead of having to install two virtually identical LC releases.

[Klaus]

Richard,

I was not born yesterday , so I really did not mean to have FULL (= encrypted or whatever the difference between the Community
and the PAID HTML5 license output is) in the Indy and Business edition, just to be able to ouptput the SAME (GPL ruled) HTML5 stuff
as the Community edition does. Know what I mean?

And FULL (see above) HTML5 output only with the extra HTML5 licence.


Best

Klaus

[FourthWorld]

The two packages are distributed under very different licenses. Mixing components between them would invalidate the licensing, and/or complicate the build process.

Hard drive space has never been cheaper. Internal drives cost less than $50/terabyte. Even with my slow connection, LC takes only a couple minutes to download and a few seconds to install. Like many here, I already have multiple copies of LC installed anyway.

We're all entitled to our opinions, and mine is that it's not all that onerous to just use the Community Edition when sharing a work for any supported platform under the terms of the GPL is the goal.

[Klaus]

Richard,

it is not about too few hd space or download speed/time/bandwidth or whatever, it is about the principle!
But I understand now that mixing licenses is obviously a (too) big legal problem, OK, get the message, end of discussion!


Best

Klaus