:: Forums ⇒

#31: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Mystic, Location: Spokane, WA USA

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:41 am
----
I really don't want to cause problems, based on the GPL it just doesn't seem like you can have an integrated module with a GPL'ed program and have it more restrictive with its license.

The way to achieve your goal would seem to create a stand-alone downloads module (or whatever) and then have a minor connector to allow it to function with Dragonfly.

For example musox has taken the program TNG and made it work with Dragonfly. This is an example of what you are trying to achieve.

Creating a Dragonfly module that is very integrated with Dragonfly, and in fact cannot work on its own, does not follow the GPL. Just my viewpoint, of course. Wink

#32: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Genbushi, Location: USA

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:10 am
----
Yeah, licensing, specifically GPL, is a real lively topic at times. I'd have to very much agree with Mr. DJMaze on most aspects in regards to this; the open source world is full of copy\paste guru's. There's a huge difference in participating in open source programming, learning from peer code, giving back, etc...and just blatantly copying code into another products source. I think that is the main reason for the licensing differences, if I'm not mistaken. This is one of the major drawbacks of GPL, as people will always abuse it's openness.

#33: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Mystic, Location: Spokane, WA USA

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:27 am
----

Genbushi wrote:

the open source world is full of copy\paste guru's. There's a huge difference in participating in open source programming, learning from peer code, giving back, etc...and just blatantly copying code into another products source.

That's essentially the whole point of the GPL, take what has been done and modify it to your needs. If you don't want your code to be "blatantly" copied into other projects don't use the GPL.

It's really that simple.

Nobody forces anyone to code for a GPL project. It's always funny to see someone fork a GPL project, and yes, blatantly copy the code, then realize they have put a lot of work into modifying it and suddenly want some form of compensation after the fact.

This is sour grapes, or poor sportsmanship. There are probably more failed open source projects that end this way then there are successful ones that remain free and excellent.

Point blank, if you want to make money from your hard work and retain the rights to your code, steer clear of the open source and GPL worlds. Trying to cash in upon hindsight is bad form and is not what the whole open source and GPL projects are all about.

Have you ever played a game when you were kids, and had one kid seem to try and change the rules when the game was not going their way?

Yeah, it's like that.

#34: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Genbushi, Location: USA

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:43 am
----
True, definitely, not arguement there. I'm just saying it's a quagmire, that's all, and can certainly see DJMaze's view.

#35: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: tsykoduk, Location: a Chair

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:45 am
----

Mystic wrote:

Point blank, if you want to make money from your hard work and retain the rights to your code, steer clear of the open source and GPL worlds. Trying to cash in upon hindsight is bad form and is not what the whole open source and GPL projects are all about.

Not true - it is very possible to make money off of open source. You can sell GPL'd programs (tho you cannot keep the person that you sell them to from handing them out). You can charge for support, services, upgrades or what have you. Just look at Ubuntu, Red Hat, Google for gosh sake. Google is built on Open Source, GPL'd stuff. DFBounty is a perfect example of how to make money from GPL'd stuff.

#36: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Kuragari, Location: AnimeEgo

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:16 am
----

tsykoduk wrote:

Not true - it is very possible to make money off of open source.

I agree, not only possible its EASY

But, you actually have to provide a service for that money, not sit around waiting for it to be handed to you.

All the projects tsykoduk mentioned as successful GPL projects provide community AND developer support.
In return they recieve the support (money) from the users.

#37: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Mystic, Location: Spokane, WA USA

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:29 am
----
I sit corrected... You're washing our vehicle when we get to work Duk... Wink

(kidding, of course)

#38: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Phoenix, Location: Netizen

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:44 am
----
As well as drifting off-topic, this whole topic seems to be drifting into a battle of words between wannabe lawyers with no real world expertise.

DJ, you and Trevor can do with Downloads Pro as you wish, contrary to the definitive legal opinions already expressed, though I suspect you already know that to be true. Kinda ironic that so many with objections to the notion of licenses with fees are using DF as a vehicle for making money for themselves or others.

Ignore all the wannabe lawyers who have been quoting the FSF FAQ as the basis for their legal expertise - they know not what they do when they quote snippets and take semi-paragraphs and paragraphs out of context.

Even the FSF very carefully qualifies its own FAQ statements - it is wisely couched in terms like "we believe", "could be a basis", "judges will decide". After all, FAQ are just that - they carry no legal weight.

Anyone who has ever had any real involvement in licensing will tell you that the GPL is a quagmire and has its problems with many legal losses in the real world already, which is why GPLv3 is on its way, though realistically that is probably a year away.

People who wish to further demonstrate their legal prowess are most welcome to tell the FSF how it should work by commenting on the draft - they would also welcome your support.

So how about we return to addressing protoplasm's original concerns.

#39: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: snbdon,

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:26 am
----
Hello,

I think i'll add my 2 cents here. As a user who is probably much older than the average dragonfly user i'm almost 50 and a user who is actually semi-retired from my chosen profession(i'm one of those people people love to hate im guess what? a lawyer) I thought i would weigh in here.

First off the base dragonfly cms in my opinion is so far superior to all others it's not even close.The people who coded it did a magnificient job as far as i can tell. I thank them for there work!

As to the whole open source arguement well everyones right and everyones wrong in some ways.A good lawyer would win some and loose some in any legal claim or proceeding based on the use of any open source code and for that matter any shareware or freeware code based on precedents and actual use and misuse of code and licensing.I'm not going to get into all the legal mumbo-jumbo more than that.

I think everyones missing the point that protoplasm made in his opening statement and the one that djmaze in repsonse. Proto is concerned that dragonfly is going to take a more closed turned as to future releases of modules and other addons for dragonfly and that may restrict coders from using there skills to to tweek certain aspects to certain sites. This is a valid concern as far as I can tell.

Djmaze on the otherhand says that while the whole dragonfly base core will remain opensource a developer has the right to make some money off releases such as modules and blocks that they have worked hard on. He also wants dragonfly to have some exclusive modules that only work in dragonfly which i think is also a goodthing.

To those who say whats wrong with other cms porting modules like downloads pro i say, why do you use dragonfly? it's probably because it has some exclusive features that say joomla and phpnuke don't. To those who say then well dragonfly is really a fork( i guess thast the word) of phpnuke and modules made for it and the very core itself should be able to be tweeked like dragonfly was I say your wrong and that you would still be using phpnuke if that was the case.

I have a few suggestions for all, first off dragonfly is the best by far I would hate to see it forked or whatever so here are my suggestions

1)this site remains the heart of dragonfly core and all future releases be made from this site. It also should be made the cheerleader if you will of dragonfly where open comments and suggestions are asked for and appreciated. The coders take to the backround and develope and let the forums administrators and pr people take the lead here.

2) this site should get out of the business of releasing themes and modules and blocks and designate one or two official sites for both downloads and themes that are both endored and promoted by this site. where ideas between coders and site promo people are shared and implemented.

3) the community itself should be recognized by the coders and admins as an intregal part of dragonfly not as some leaches or under or over 18yo who"don't have brains" as i have seen here. yet the community must back the projest through not only ideas but if they can there pocketbook. All sites could use donations or help the community should stand up in that regard if they can.

I told my wife and kids at the beginning of the year when I semi-retired that i wanted to make a website that rivaled yahoo. I know a lofty goal and probably laughable but, i also said 25 years ago i wanted to retire before i was 50 and people laughed. I believe the core dragonfly cms will help me reach my goal.

I like protoplasm, am concerned that the community is taking a wrong term only i have different reasons. I think the attitude of some of the take it or leave it people here
is horrible for the community and needs to change. I think the attitude that you owe me free releases and that everything should be 100 percent planned is also detrimental to the community.

I think right now the original developers should hand over the control of some of the outerworks like this forum to people who are more PR wise and experienced and move into the background as the great coders they are. They should delegate and work in conjunction with other quality sites to branch off the responsibility of themes and modules and such. agreat sites working together can only make dragonfly not only better but the best.

These are just my opinions and suggestions for what there worth.

thanks

#40: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: DJ Maze, Location: http://tinyurl.com/5z8dmv

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:57 am
----
I want to thank protoplasm and snbdon for their comments in here.
You both would be a good addition to the theme due to your wise words.

However the internet is full of fake words and people with attitude, it is hard to learn to pick the good apples.
In the real world i was very capable of doing that and tell my boss who was a good addition to the shop but on the internet you can be however you want to be.
This "fear" is based on many issues discovered in the past and due to a big boost of members on this website.

As i explained a few months back i wanted to add more people aboard and shift away from coding but, recent discovered issues have put me back on coding.

#41: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: BrokenCrust,

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:32 am
----

Quote::

DJ, you and Trevor can do with Downloads Pro as you wish, contrary to the definitive legal opinions already expressed, though I suspect you already know that to be true.

I agree, but I think that you miss the point. At the "donate if you like my work" level, licenses are labels and nothing more. People who want to use your code will take it and use it. If you are unwiling or unable to sue, possibly in another part of the world which doesn't have laws like you do, then there is sod all that you can do. OpenSource is exaclty that open, for use or abuse, good or bad. And as Snbdon points out, you have at best a 50-50 chance in court, in fact since the onus is on you to prove theft of a bunch of php code, I'd say it's going to be way less. Plus it's not like someone else is going to make millions from your coding is it. So basically the license is mute anyway, even if it is legal and enforcable, which is doubtful at best.

Quote::

this site remains the heart of dragonfly core and all future releases be made from this site.

I agree with this too, but I suspect little will stop this now, except maybe an open election of new devs and a Project Manager, who burn a new release immediately.

Quote::

this site should get out of the business of releasing themes and modules and blocks

Yeap. I think is the issue. Modules, Blocks and Themes = functionality = Money. An excellent core for them to work on is kinda hidden unless it breaks. Charging $60 for support of a download module that allows your porn site to rack in the cash vs. $60 to reduce memory abuse by using unbuffered SQL queries? It's a hard sell.

That said, I'm not sure that people want to go a whole bunch of places to get their website working. One zip and one set of instuctions seems to baffle many folks.

Also this plays into the hands of the "forkers", since, in this case they actually only want a clean core on which to place their carefully selected and crafted modules.

Dragonfly won't survive as a clean core alone, because most users don't know any more about coding that most people do about the inards of the car they drive. Kit cars, are a specialist item and most folks choose to drive ready made, and it's the same with web sites. If after spending an afternoon installing DF only to find that it doesn't do anything without more downloads (and which one do I need to make a webpage?) users will swap to a complete product (which they find during the search for the things that they didn't get with the DF download).

#42: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Kendle,

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:18 pm
----
I agree with Brokencrust ^

However, whilst I don't think DF should "get out of the business of releasing themes, modules and blocks" I think they should "get out of the business of making themes, modules and blocks".

As a user I'd want to come here, download a package, and upload / install it. But at the same time I'd understand that because there are dozens of modules, and because I almost certainly didn't need them all, they didn't come in the .zip and I had to pick which ones I wanted. I would however expect to pick them from the place I got the core (as opposed to trusting to Google or bothering people by asking), and I'd expect the ones I picked to upload / install as easily as the core did (which DF modules do already).

Also, I'm done writing free modules for DF personally. I announced mKnow v3.0 on here and the only response from DF staff was to tell me my sig was too big! I've since written modules for dfbounty and got paid for them.

But if I could write modules for DF and distribute them from here, and charge perhaps for customisation / installation / whatever other "services" I was able to provide, the aims of dfbounty would be fulfilled (people get what they want, coders get paid for their efforts).

I'd be happy to pay a fee to the DF devs for distributing my modules, that way they get paid for their efforts (producing the core), which seems to have been what prompted this thread in the first place.

So users get a world class core + access to squillions of quality modules. They may or may not have to pay something for some of them, that's their choice (and dfbounty wouldn't exist if some weren't willing to make it).

Coders get access to DF's installed base (I have <200 members on my site, DF has >6000), and so can perhaps charge significantly less for their services than they might otherwise, further benefiting the consumer.

And the DF Devs receive an income for distributing modules and charging their authors for the privilege, which allows them to concentrate on developing the core and rewards them for doing so.

I've no idea how GPL fits into that, tho I suspect it's like someone commented previously, people use the word lightly without understanding what it means, and usually take it to mean they can get stuff for free and charge someone else for it.

#43: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: djdevon3,

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:19 pm
----
I would pay for modules because they take substantially longer to create than themes. I have a deep appreciation for anyone that creates modules. They are more complex than themes (at least to me anyway).

I don't think it would be nice to ask the devs to stick to the core only. Dragonfly began because of work done on the coppermine module. Dragonfly's roots are in module creation and theme creation.

It doesn't matter what happens with DF as long as it's for the better of Maze and the devs. They put way too much work in it to see them alienated by their own community for stupid reasons. It's not good to peeve the devs. So I say whatever the hell maze wants to do as far as GPL should be up to Maze and Maze alone. Though Maze you did set yourself up when you asked for opinions. Asking though is a good thing and show everyone here that you care what we think. Even though our opinions and the devs might not coincide I'm sure there can be some type of compromise that will keep everyone happy.

#44: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: Genbushi, Location: USA

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:27 pm
----
I'd like to mention how good this discussion is, some great perspectives on here.

I work with several frameworks, mainly DragonFly, Xoops, Joomla and Drupal. They're all great packages and I commend all the devs. DragonFly is my favorite code-wise, as I find it the most efficiently and securely coded with maintaining simplicity of use. IMO DJMaze has done\is doing a rather miraculous job, thanks!

Being this is a DragonFly site, I hate to talk about other communities, however I think looking at the path of other projects can be beneficial in many ways. As Joomla\Mambo is very popular in the CMS arena it's intereting to note how they set their communies up:

- Core with base functionality.
- Add-ons by 3rd party devs (3PDs)
- Themes by 3PDs

The core foundation supplies a core, continues development, security updates, support and home base for the community and a convenient gateway to find resources (addons, themes).

3PDs make all the addons, themes, etc for the provided core. Additionally, MANY of those addons and themes are sold for...gasp...money! Smile

In fact, many devs and businesses have sprouted and grown around supplying products\services for a fee, for the open source core. That's a pretty good and healthy idea if you ask me. Heck, you grab Joomla core and there's not much in there really (pretty icons); no forums, no messaging, no download section...it all has to be added in. I've built sites for clients and have bought addons and themes to best suit what I needed to do. Most of the companies selling addons\themes have built up their businesses by supplying the community with a certain amount of freely available goods too of course...it supports the community and builds their business.

#45: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: snbdon,

Posted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:13 pm
----
hello again,

If i am hearing djamze correclty he is saying that he will or has sarted a new job that will take up much of his time and perhaps prevent him from being as involved in the design of dragonfly due to some agrements with his new employer. he has also indicated that another programmer is traveling the world and another is just busy with life. maybe i'm wrong but what i think he might be saying is that its hard for him to give all the support that is asked by the community as to mods and themes and even to the base core with all that happens in life and so on.

Perhaps it would be better then to take those functions and let certain sites who can focus on mod developement and mod support to that site and the same for themes. Those sites could have links from this site so it wouldn't be hard to find. Look this site has more than six thousand members and djmaze is just starting a new chapter in his life, its kinda unfair to ask him to do more. I suspect that since coppermine and other mods are part of the core now they will be in the future so let others with support from this site do that work and let the core be developed without all the other requests.

Its not that he can't do mods and release them maybe even for money or what have you , but let him and his core developers make the core better and let others in conjunction with this site do the other work. Let others be the cheerleaders for the project and the day to day activities of running the forums and other support features.

djmaze and his developers have done the hard work of getting dragonfly off the ground now maybe time to let others carry the ball and run with it.

-> Licenses, GPL & Violations

All times are GMT

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next :| |: Page 3 of 4