the licenses with the new modules
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  :| |:
-> Licenses, GPL & Violations

#46: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: DJ MazeLocation: http://tinyurl.com/5z8dmv PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:27 pm
    ----
snbdon wrote:
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.

Who will stand up?

I've asked this several times and even posted a news item about it last year. We've got in total 1 respond Crying or Very sad
So instead of pointing fingers and saying others should take a task it is wise to look at yourself first (unless you did request).

Some said "hey i wanna code" but after we requested "give us some code" we got nothing or it was not up to the dragonfly standards.
These standards don't imply tabs or structure, they are based on the knowledge/skills you have with PHP.
You don't have to know everything about PHP nor Dragonfly but: ask, search, discuss.

Nano is a great addition to our team since last year, he is coding and when he doesn't understand something he asks me or akamu privately.

#47: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: RoninLocation: Calgary, AB PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:34 pm
    ----
DJMaze wrote:
Nano is a great addition to our team since last year, he is coding and when he doesn't understand something he asks me or akamu privately.

Excellent! Is there any way this could be done in public (forum posts) as it would probably help many others also?

#48: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: snbdon PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:55 pm
    ----
well all i know how to do is code basic blocks as i have done on my own site and have released one here that needs updating.
what i am willing to do is setup a forums or even two that can address both mod and theme support. i have plenty of space on my site to do both. i can then forward these questions to the coders here or at officially recognized sites or whatever. i am also prepared to offer space to people who want to add downloads for themes or mods. I would also be willing to host polls and surveys that help coders know what people want. I am willing to freely promote dragonfly in both forums and download sections. I would even be willing to set up a domain thats affiliated with dragonfly(this site) that does all the above something like dragonflysupport.com or whatever. hopefully this will attract some people that already have the core but want to expand the modules and themes. I will only do this in affiliation with dragonfly and not attempt to fork it or whatever.

#49: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: protoplasm PostPosted: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:17 pm
    ----
DJMaze wrote:

Who will stand up?

This is a good question for starters and is certainly encouraging to me as a dedicated DF user. Thanks for asking.

I'm am willing to volunteer. Some of my personal areas of interest involve strategy/brain storming, organization, and perhaps documenting and design. I've worn many hats in the past: I believe I've had a fairly broad range of practical life experience that DF might find useful.

---
If you can tolerate one more uninvited suggestion, a first recomendation might be to address the 'Join a Group' block: statements that say: This is a closed group: no more users accepted could be changed to allow people to 'apply' to join a group of their own personal interests and passion. New blood will only revitalize your organization. Criteria could be put in place so that a provisional group membership could become permanent if certain expectations are met.

You might also consider convening an online roundtable of all the people who are already involved in the DF groups and entertain ideas and discussions about where DF should be headed.

#50: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: c4actbeLocation: San Francisco PostPosted: Tue May 02, 2006 6:58 pm
    ----
Here is my vision on direction/purpose of development, based on my own observations:

Everything has a price. The success of any development project has a commercial value, and those two things cannot be disconnected from each other

Reason to start GPL-licensed project:
- Someone has an interesting/innovative approach, but doesn't have enough of "something" (skills/time/experience .. whatever).

- Once idea has been published, project lead tries to assemble his development team, which is a group of people willing to share initial development "costs" (everything has a price, even GPLed products). If the idea is worth something, actual development starts ..

Why release under GPL?

- the core functionality is a result of collective efforts. GPL protects rights of everyone who contributed to the project. That is why one can do pretty much anything (sell, re-distribute), but must keep original credits.

What exactly should be developed under GPL
- Core functionality, documentation, tools which will allow further development.

As soon an average developer-"outsider" has enough tools/documentation to develop on his own, the GPL part of the project would be complete.

From this point everybody is free to do their own thing: create thems, modules, blocks. It shouldn't matter what kind of license they will release their work under: distribution, license enforcement, credits, support should be module/thems/block's author.
At this point the core development team could earn by providing consulting services.

Further development of the core:

- There should be one simple rule: if your GPL/commercial project requires core modification, this part of the code must be released GPL and be contributed according specific predefined standards. Everything else, such as license, should be up to developer

So if the original idea is good, intial implementatioon (core functionality) is good, - no doubt that there would be a demand for consulting, for core modification, for KEEPING THE PROJECT ALIVE.


Support scheme:
Core developers =1=> Developers =2=> end users

where (1) is should be rather commercial because developers will be benefiting from using core app in any case (disregarding the type of license they are going to release their work).

Reasons for developers to releae new modules under GPL
- to build reputation and credability;
- to gain experience and to earn respect from other developers and community;
- to attract end users to invest into them.

Other possibilities:
- if someone has developed some functionality for his project and doesn't mind share, or just doesn't have any interest to support it.


What's "wrong" with cpgnuke/dragonfly today:
- unhealthy overdedication;
- movement forward without real plan;
- attempts to establish "the one and only" license/way/standard/direction.

What will happen?

- Sooner or later dedication will wear off..
- moving forward you can only so much..
- there is no way to establish "the one and only" anytything because everybody's different


No doubt that Dragonfly is amazing product,created by really talented and dedicated people. A lot of efforts were invested into development of advanced functionality. "overall" level of the program is much higher than average, but does it have a commercial value? Not much. Most of the users don't need such advanced functionality, but they need "little things". "Downloads Pro" is a good example of that. I don't think that "average" user will truly appreciate all that luxury of having this beautiful application for free. If we'll put a price tag of $100 and at the same time will continue to have older GPLed Downloads to be available, how many people will buy it? 1-2? and if the price tag would be $10? I think that even if the price will be that cheap, no more that 10-15% of users will be spending their $$ for this particular module.

Things that could/should be done now
- Core team should stop all new development/enhancements.It's time for Spring Cleaning, which would be a strategical step backward, which is needed to be able to advance in future.
- Dragonfly should be stripped down to basics: all "heavy" things should be temporarily removed (cpg gallery, forum etc). When we'll have bare bone system, it will be clear what needs to be documented/enhanced /improved. Core team will create a plan which will have the only 1 purpose: to complete GPL part of the project. There are many developers who will be interested to participate. As soon as we'll have light , flexible and well-documented core, it will be clear how prioritize further development.
A simple voting will clarify what's important and what's not.
At the same time developers will have an opportunity to offer their services and express their interests.. At the moment we have almost all modules in 2 variations, including galleries.
I don't think i'll be alone, if i'd say that i 'd rather pay someone to have exactly what i need vs. use what's available.
I always had special relationships with Coppermine gallery: we mutually hated each other. I never liked it and never used it. Since the gallery of my choice has always been Menalto, i would want to see it on my site. My options would be
- to find someone who embedded menalto on his time and decided to release this module under GPL because he/she has no intentions /possibilities to support it.
- to pay some developer to create this module for me, so i'd be the one deciding under which license i want to re-distribute it (or not).
- to find other people looking for the same functionality and share all costs with them.
If core development team is still favoring coppermine, it's up to them to invest their time and release coppermine module under whatever license they want.

2 really good examples of this scheme of developments are SugarCRM and Joomla.
SugarCRM is in demand. I know one of developers and he's doing REALLY well making living off development additional enhancements. Joomla developers looked around, analyzed situation and started many HOT projects, which sparked interest from potential users. "Hot Property" is a really attractive real estate listing/management module. Other group jumped into oscommerce porting, while 3rd group invested into implementation of SugarCRM. Joomla developers made their CMS attractive and accessible for business. Businesses expressed their interest to use this symbiosis. The result - everybody's happy, Joomla is booming and we're sitting here and talking about licensing..
Just my $0.02

#51: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: protoplasm PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2006 2:43 am
    ----
c4actbe wrote:

Things that could/should be done now
- Core team should stop all new development/enhancements.It's time for Spring Cleaning, which would be a strategical step backward, which is needed to be able to advance in future.
- Dragonfly should be stripped down to basics: all "heavy" things should be temporarily removed (cpg gallery, forum etc). When we'll have bare bone system, it will be clear what needs to be documented/enhanced /improved. Core team will create a plan which will have the only 1 purpose: to complete GPL part of the project. There are many developers who will be interested to participate. As soon as we'll have light , flexible and well-documented core, it will be clear how prioritize further development.

Thought provoking. I like some of your ideas and agree with a number of your observations.

I'm dreaming now. Wondered if it was possible to have a lightweight, 'hardened' core and a universal bridge that could plug into any number of other GPL programs. It would be interesting if universal standards could be developed and adopted. Maybe they already have? I've been examining a lot of the GPL programs out there and you might be surprised to see the developmental vigor that some software is enjoying. So by branching off to CPG-BB, all the ongoing vigor in phpbb2+ and its mods will be lost. Coppermine integration precludes Gallery2, an outstanding new version or Menalto as you suggested. So paring down the software seems interesting to me. I realize that DF developers have great security standards, but it seems to me that other some of the bigger GPL programs are starting to pay more attention to security--at least from what I can see. Albeit, ther is still a lot of wack-a-mole patching going on. But if DF development is halted or even held in abeyance for a short period of time, where does that leave DF's security? Is it possible to develop a core that doesn't need to be changed or is that what DF believes it has done? I think TYPO3 believes they have a solid core. But it seems to have other issues. Talk about weighty. I installed it and it drags even without all the extras.

As far as my contribution to the DF 'GPL' goes (I'm trying to justify this post in the licenses with new modules thread), I'm nearing completion of a Classified Ads program built on tweeking cpg-bb functionality. I've used NukeC before, but I wasn't impressed really. Because the functionality of the cpg-bb/phpbb2 is fairly good, it really is relatively easy to tweek, even for this relative nu-be to php/DF/etc. After which, I'm going to look into how difficult it might be to create a GPL bridge to Zen Cart.

All-in-all, my appraisal of DF is that it delivers a heavy weight punch in the welter weight division (it's one speedy little app that's fairly light on its feet, imo).

#52: Re: the licenses with the new modules Author: DulacLocation: TN PostPosted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 8:19 am
    ----
Imo, technology needs both open-source and closed-source to grow. I think both sides need to be respected. Like the x-lawyer guy that want to destroy yahoo(hope ya do), I have a big goal for my website as well(compete against gamspot) Smile . Thanks to this module that is quite possible. I plan to learn php for development(I am used to c++ and other oop stuff) and release what may help out the community as open-source. More than likely no restriction, since it won't be major devolopment and that's how I am with the small stuff I do(just throw my name in there somewheres).



-> Licenses, GPL & Violations

All times are GMT

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