Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | szdszdszd's comments login

Gridifier was designed specially for use with Backbone/Angular/React. We were using Backbone for our apps, but we will definitely look how to sync it with Angular/React. It was too heavy BTW - so the most logical step was to rewrite it completely at first, and after that start creating tutorials+codepens.


React operates completely differently from Backbone and Angular. I've looked only briefly at your code, but it looks like it operates directly on the DOM, which is not going to work with React.


Hmmm, I haven't tried React yet. Yeah, now it operates directly on the DOM, but all functions for DOM manipulation are located in separate class, so maybe we will try hook them somehow. Looked at React docs really quickly, it seems they have been abstracted away DOM manipulation to prevent unnecessary browser reflow/recalc ops. So, I can't predict now how easily it will be to sync it with React.(we will try to do it)


Actually, the virtual DOM isn't to prevent unnecessary operations, it's to ensure consistency. State transitions cause a render, which builds the virtual DOM (for each component) from scratch, ensuring that the same state always results in the same rendering output. This is different from, say, Backbone, where you create or modify individual DOM elements, and this logic is typically spread out across many functions.


"Any use of Gridifier for a commercial purpose is subject to and requires a commercial license. With commercial license GPLv3 license terms are not used. Instead of that, terms described on developer license page are applyied."

That means, that if product is being used for commercial purposes, GPLv3 license rules are not applied.


> That means, that if product is being used for commercial purposes, GPLv3 license rules are not applied.

Except GPL section 7 says I can ignore your non-commercial restriction. If you want to restrict commercial use, you must pick a different license. GPL won't work.


here is the full text for you to examine

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt

another post mentions section seven: Additional Terms; i had to look it up to check the commentator's assertion

i'd suggest explaining in clear terms what you would like to achieve with the licensing of your work

i am sure the people here would be happy to help you find an agreeable license

another resource: http://choosealicense.com/licenses/


Ok, I have read section 7 one more time and debates over the internet. As I see many users are unhappy with such type of dual licensing.

Which scheme will be perfectly clear for everyone? Will http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for non-commercial/ developer license for commercial be ok for everyone?



Unless you're a contract lawyer I would always default to assuming the least beneficial outcome for yourself when something isn't clear cut.


I think there are better licenses for the "want your cake and eat it too" scenario.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: