[Feature Request]: Support for different licensing models

[stf675]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

"Licenses" Module while impressive, does not allow proper tracking of some common licensing modes. few examples:

• Per user vs Per Device licensing. Example: O365 License allow product to be installed on 5 devices per licensed user.
• Visual Studio is per user and can be installed on any number of devices.
• in addition to be "Reassignable" license may have limitation like "after X days"
• Is license usable after expiration? (Some subscriptions allow use without upgrade rights)
• Perpetual license with "Upgrades Rights and Support" or "Support Only" (Is that what "Maintained" checkbox is for?)
• Downgraded ("Downgradeable"): Some Licenses allow to use previous version of product.
• Sometimes Licenses apply to components and are property of that component. Raid controller can have licensed features that part of the controller and moved with that component if reused in different asset.

Describe the solution you'd like

What would help a lot is:

• Ability to add custom fields to "Licenses"
• Optionally separate "Subscription" and "Non Subscription" "Licenses" in its own modules/submodules since there is major difference how they apply to users or devices.
• Ability to assign license to component(s)

Describe alternatives you've considered

No response

Additional context

No response

[snipe]

We're already aware of this feature request - it's been requested many times before and will be part of the license overhaul that's coming up

[snipe]

Custom fields for (almost) everything is coming, but I'm not sure this is the right path for this particular use case. There can (and likely will) be different business logic/triggers/alerts/etc enthuse different use cases, so creating "dumb" data fields doesn't seem like it solves the problem correctly.

[snipe]

(What I mean to say is that we're internally working through these problems, and while just throwing custom fields at it is a solution, I think it probably requires more integration, since - as you rightly point out - there are different business rules for each of these use cases.)