hm, so does this mean a fork into 2 different development environments? i.e.: sp...

wycats · on Dec 8, 2011

"Blossom will use the GPLv3 license, with commercial licensing similar to the Sencha model."

I don't have a clear idea about what's going on in the SproutCore community, but I don't think this has universal support.

One of the reasons we rebranded to Amber is that our codebase is inspired by SproutCore 1, but it is a complete rewrite, targeting a smaller file size and web-centric development.

All of the fragments of SproutCore 1.x target native-style applications with a ton of JavaScript, while Amber targets ambitious web-style applications using HTML and CSS for the presentation layer. Amber apps don't have much in common with SproutCore 1 (or "blossom") apps, so a clean naming break felt like a clarifying thing to do.

erichocean · on Dec 8, 2011

Blossom is a commercial product, it's not part of the proposed SproutCore.js path forward for SproutCore 1.x.

It is, however, API-compatible with the MIT-licensed view layer (called "Classic") in SproutCore.js.

See the paper for more details.