Joomla! Discussion Forums

I saw the notes on the Xaneon 'exit' in the General forum, stage right... towards Drupal.

Hopefully they will deliver on the promised 'one more release.  What's your take on this Ken?  Anyone contact you on wanting to collaborate on this project as a solid interim for SEF?

Discussions like this remind me of a quote from a Western Philosophy class I had in college.
It was either Socrates or Plato who said (paraphrasing here) - "When there is no argument left, attack the man."

Basically it means that when someone is losing the argument based on the facts, they turn to bashing the opposing party.

So far I am ignorant, evil, and lazy.
You set the tone - let's go there.

The performance issues don't seem to bother the hundreds (thousands ?) of people who are running SEF Advance.
The issue of performance has nothing to do with open source.
Smokescreen.

The issue of support has nothing to do with open source.
The community can provide also assistance with open source.
Another smokescreen.

Could money be an issue?
1,000 buyers x 40 Euro = 40,000 Euros.
DUH.

SEF Advance is a stain on the reputation of this project.
The arguments against it being a conflict of interest are transparent BS.


A new article on the Xaneon site shows I am not alone in my conclusions.
http://xaneon.com/content-management-sy ... mambo.html

Some quotes:

Page 3

"Pretty much the only "hook" into Mambo's core, to allow any significant third-party extension to Mambo's base functionality without modifying the core files, is the SEF support. (A cynical person might argue that even this "hook" exists only for the benefit of a certain commercial SEF extension developed by a core developer.)"

Page 5

Over the last year, many people have privately expressed their concerns to us about the fact that a Mambo core developer is charging for a SEF component that should, in their view, be integrated in Mambo's core. From our own "inside perspective", we can, on one hand, understand this developer charging for his component, since we know the work involved in developing a comprehensive Mambo SEF solution. (Come to think of it, charging for ours might have motivated us to actually finish it.) On the other hand, we must agree that Mambo should come with significantly better SEF support out-of-the-box, and that the current situation is curious, to say the least. We do believe the (former) core team to be in serious error on this matter.


Gee, isn't that curious.
A very knowledgeable programmer familiar with the code has the same opinion.
He also said others have said the same thing to him.
People don't want to talk about this for fear of offending an insider.
For the good of the community, I'll say it again.
SEF Advance is a stain on the reputation of this project.
This is not defensible - it is a conflict of interest which should be rectified.


Onward . . .  Getting an open source advanced SEF

I did contact the guys at Xaneon regarding project and specifically the documentation.
Arto, the lead developer of XE2, replied.

"You hereby have our permission to freely use whatever documentation we
have written for XE2 under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation
License, provided attribution and a link to our site are maintained."

So, I will be making documentation.
I also mirrored the Xaneon web site to preserve the info.

"I don't know the schedule for beta 3 yet; obviously, we want to get it
out of the door as soon as possible, to get some closure on this. I
think we're going to make a general call for patches, soon, and do a
release about one week after that. I'll keep you informed."

So a XE2 Beta 3 is in the works.

I just got another email from Arto while I was writing this.

"As a status update to you, our recent news have triggered an avalanche
of incoming e-mails, all very supportive and encouraging. It seems this
project is more active, now that it's dead, than ever when it was
alive

By this date, we've heard from half a dozen developers interested in
taking over the project, and a good number of others willing to be
involved in other ways; the list includes some of the most-known names
in the wider Mambo community.

This would indicate the future and continuity of Xaneon Extensions, or
"OpenSEF" or whatever it may later become known as, is ensured. We'll
just have to tackle the practical problem of how to proceed from this
point onwards to set up a viable project structure."

I had suggested it be renamed OpenSEF going forward.

It looks like things are progressing rapidly.
Isn't it amazing how "open source" brings out the help of the community?


I would suggest further discussions of the new project continue in this thread:
Xaneon Extensions looking for a New Home
http://forum.opensourcematters.org/inde ... 115.0.html

Regards,

Ken

I apologize if I've opened YOU up to personal attacks, Ken.  You've always been one of the most responsive peeps to me, here and in forums past. 

Bein' relatively new to the Mamb* world, I just wanted to call light to something that I felt was a gross oversite on the development of an otherwise scheckzy CMS.  I now know that this is not a new subject, nor a benign one.  I agree with you that until this is resolved on a core level, it will continue to haunt us as a shortcoming in the software.

I'm not going to speak to motives or other things.  I respect that Saka posted here and shared his opinion on the subject.  The only thing I would perhaps appreciate, as this is apparently the heavyist topic in the Wish & Features, is if we could see that the whole Core Team is in agreement on this topic--timing will be a matter not settled until a new roadmap is in place.

Okay, I'm done.  I appreciate the advocacy you've provided, Ken.  I'll see ya in the development forum for OpenSEF.

Xaneon Extensions becomes OpenSEF

OpenSEF Project Formed
http://xaneon.com/news/20050826-opensef ... ormed.html

I bashed you? I gave you the reasons why I haven't integrated SEF advance into the core, and the reasons are technical. If you would know more about Mambo, its programming and structure you would know that those reasons are facts. I suggest you read my previous post again and not concentrate on the "bashing" part.


It wasn't personal. I was talking in general. This has been discussed many times before.


I wish I had thousands of customers. However the performance isn't the only issue here. I explained very clearly several reasons among which maintenance, support etc.
I spent many years developing Mambo and custom solutions for Mambo. 90% of my contribution you are using for free. However SEF advance is not free, but nothing stops you or anyone else to write your own solution. Go ahead!


Again I don't have nearly as many customers. However as I said SEF advance requires considerable load of work every day. I can't do that for free, but am doing many other things for Mambo for free.
It's simply NOT TRUE that better SEF is not being added because I am selling a component that does that. I never oposed making the better SEF in core. If you make clean, maintenance free and bug free solution we will integrate it today! It's just my opinion that it can't be done before Mambo is restructured from ground.


The hook was provided to enable easy install of all SEF components out there, not only SEF advance. In that moment there was 3-4 other SEF components out there and they all made use of this hook. If I wanted only SEF advance to be supported I wouldn't have done it that way.



I wish you all the best. It's only good that there are several SEF solutions out there before we redesign the Mambo's structure and make it suitable for more advanced SEF in the core.

Hi Ken:

Great news ! Good to see such a promising project "saved" and interest rekindled. To have a project at v2 beta and disappear would be too great a loss to the community.

That said, I was kinda hoping that the project would be "absorbed" into our mambo and become a "Core" component like "Banners" & "Polls" - and maybe shipped with the next version of our mambo ?

Is there a benefit to having it as a "Project" on it's own ?

PS: Downloaded and installed the software on one of my sites. It worked great for the mambo links, but when I "hard linked" URL's from mambo-phpshop, it worked for a while and then refused to work and threw up 404 Errors for pages that were working perfectly only minutes before.

It you want me as a Tester for the project, you can count me in.

^^based on this statement,.. i just wish to confirm that IF the *ambo DB is restructured so then the advance SEF will be integrated?

IF then, that would answer the question of @malibu in this thread's title.

Yes. That's what I've been saying all the time. And it has been on the roadmap for future versions (5.0) together with unlimited level of categories and node base content structure.
It will be new URL solution totally based on the new structure of core, both non-SEF and SEF URLs will be changed.

thank you @saka for confirming, in my opinion that would be a re-statement of assurance that this will be integrated in the core soon.

second, i guess for the time being that this db restrusctructuring is not yet implemented the public has the option to take which path; either get the 404sef(now open sef) from xaneon or the paid one from sakic. to the least, the public has an option.

third,  im also thankful to @malibu; this issue has been raised here in OSM; for now lemme ask a question, did that settled the inquiry?

guilliam

Saka, just read thru the last 3 pages and would like to thank you for all your work with Mambo and say I support your point of view in this 'discussion'.

kenmcd, malibu, I appreciate your point of view and see where your coming from, and would love to have pretty urls included with mambo too, but lets give Saka the benefit of the doubt and hopefully when v5.0 comes out, this issue will be put to rest.

OpenSourceMatters needs unity and strength at the moment to overcome the issues with the Mambo Foundation, so i hope we can all work together to KicK Miro's Ar**!! (OOPS! did I say that out loud?!)

regards to ALL

paulmac

Great.
Please go on over to http://www.xaneon.com and register.
This will register you for the forum and will get you on the contact list.

Arto, the current lead developer, is continuing to reply to the MANY email responses he received regarding the call for people to take over the project. We are hoping that the other developers who have expressed interest in taking over the project will elect to join the new team. The more talent available the faster this will progress. Right now Marko/Predator and I are doing our homework to get up to speed (there are well over 1,200 posts to read in the old forum). There are other talented developers who are already familiar with XE2 and have already contributed who we are trying to get onboard.

Re: Mambo phpShop - I am sure this problem has already been solved by others with advanced SEF components. Unfortunately since those are commercial products the information is not available. I can assure you we will work to find solutions and will fully document those solutions for all in the open source world to see.

Open Source Matters!

All this talk, and the real issue remains unsolved.

1. A Core Developer is selling a commercial component with tremendous demand.

2. The Core Developer team controls what goes in the core.

That is a conflict of interest, plain and simple.

All this about performance, I don't know the issues, etc. is just silly.
Read 1 and 2 above. It is a very simple issue.
There is not one thing preventing SEF Advance from being open source tomorrow, except money.
How people can rage about the evil commercial motivations of Miro and not be offended by this situation baffles me.

Resolve the situation - be on the Core Dev team, or be a commercial component developer.

I respect and appreciate the fantastic amount of hard work contributed by members of the Core Developer team.
But that does not change the situation.
This is wrong.

Read through the many, many posts over in the Mambo forum in the non-commercial SEF thread of over 530 posts, and tell me favoritism was not shown by not deleting the many posts pointing to SEF Advance. Any other similar obvious advertising posts are routinely modified or deleted and the author warned. Find me any other thread where this went on for that period. It must be nice when you are the moderator of your own commercial posts. Not likely to get deleted that way.

Here let me help you out - I know I am too stupid to see the ethereal code issues, but as the OpenSEF project progresses I am sure I will slowly get a clue to the deeper structural problems and blah, blah, blah, blah, blaaaaah - forget that, it is a conflict of interest and all that is BS.


Open Source Matters . . . for most of us.

In my opinion there is not so much of a conflict and I may agree with what Saka said by himself...

In fact, that the interface was added in the way it was, improved Mambo so that developers are able to offer an advanced SEF solution. That he was offering his own SEF solution commercial is ok for me... I don't need to buy it and I didn't (I did not even really considered it to be honest). I see it as an addon like any other. It would be a conflict if Mambo were only supporting SEF Advance, but I don't see this to be the case.

As for the advertising... I usually saw users "advertise" it but not himself. Which is then ok, I guess. (I am assuming no one was bought to do that "advertising" and hopefully did that because they were truly happy with it).

I really do appreciate the open source solutions and thats why I was happy with 404 SEF. I did was almost exactly what I wanted (I just extended a little bit to SEF my RSS links and making my template-directory work).
Now that the Xaneon Extension gets truly open source and it may be advanced (I don't know) then this is probably the way to go. (But it should at least offer all 404 SEF offers). And hopefully it gets better than SEF Advanced ;-)

@Ken

This is hilarious. I have read your statements and I have read Sakas statements and I can actually see no conflict of interest. Saka has said that if you can find a SEF solution that does a better job of doing it - in the core - and not rendering more supportissues you are welcome to do it.

This debate about open source and commercial development has been an issue on all OpenSource projects I've been involved in during the last 5 years. If you can't give a solution to the problem - as suggested by Saka - the stop bashing Saka after he's explained it to you. And if you want to get OpenSEF into the core, start working on making it as easy as it should be instead of wasting your (and our) time bashing a core-developer who's been giving his time to this project for years for free..

Done

I do not have the required technical background to make any judgment on the previous posts, however I would like to make a user point of view. I cannot stress enough how important a proper SEF system is to many websites, even for the small to medium size businesses or individuals that use Mambo today.
Iit looks like we will have to wait til version 5.0, that is to say not the near future to have proper SEF and that is a pity because current OS add-ons can actually degrade your ranking  instead of improving it as they make multiple URLs pointing to same content. This is very bad in Google in particular and may lead to your site being banned to some extent [have not tried SEF-Advance on this - if Saka has solved the issue, then it's feasible and maybe will be done in an OS component soon].

My point is simple : If Saka has pushed delaying the (possibly, I don't know) required DB changes to do this, then it is a conflict of interest, but we will never know so let's get over with it and try to move forward.

It is #1 on my wishlist (afterall this is the subject of this topic) that a much better SEF system is INTEGRATED very rapidly, waiting for 5.0 which is too far ahead in my opinion. If not possible in 4.5.3 then another 4.5 release is better than waiting so long. For example DB performance may not be such of an issue for sites of a few dozens pages, and then you can always turn it off and go back to regular SEF if the overload is too much. By integrating into the core a solution similar to the existing add-on, even if not perfect, would solve probably many compatibility with 3pd  components and modules. (At least the aforementioned issue should be solved.

What is possible, what is not ?

Regards to ALL


FYI, wish #2 is better ACL, #2bis is tree-type categories system, where content can belong to several categories, #3 is integrated multi-language front-end - but that is already in 4.5.3 I believe.

That is not exactly true... you have mutiple links to the same content item already without using SEF. If a certain SEF-component may avoid the problem it is only a workaround and does not implement the functions correctly. (I know a user doesn't care about it but the end result may be unpredictable).
It would be a quite easy fix at the cause (the blog output for example).
(There are quite a few threads dealing with this issue at the other forum)

@de

[Sorry, this is out of topic] I could find some threads with the problem, but not with the solution really. Only infin8 posted a workaround, found it today but did not tried yet and have to re-read the thread to understand how it works. I will od some more search. Other comments still valid though
Regards

So a better SEF is not possible until DB restructure which will only take place on version 5.0. Isn't version 5.0 only run on PHP5? Does it mean better SEF will not be available for us who run PHP4?

@battra
Better advanced SEF is available now under PHP 4 and Mambo/OSM 4.5.x.
I am told the commercial component works very well - just have to pay for it.
It appears the various insurmountable problems have been magically solved in SEF Advance.

Another solution for Mambo/OSM 4.5.x/PHP 4 is Xaneon Extensions, now called OpenSEF.
We are now putting together a new team and moving forward on building an OPEN SOURCE SEF advanced component based on the hard work of the Xaneon Dev team.
The new web site URL will be active in the next few days (http://www.opensef.org).
In the mean time, please register at http://www.xaneon.com which will get you on the contact list and register you for the OpenSEF forum.

(battra - thanks for your great tutorials!)

---

Waiting for an open source advanced SEF solution
Glad to hear the structural changes needed to do SEF easier and better will be part of the Mambo/OSM 5.
But Mambo/OSM 5 is a long way off.
Waiting until then for an open source advanced SEF is just ridiculous.
There are well over 1,200 posts in the old forum about SEF.
There is huge demand for this - NOW.

Some commercial developers are well aware of this demand.

---

@de
Please provide the info/fix on the duplicate URL problem.
This issue appears to arise in all the SEF components.
From your many other useful technical posts, I know you have the knowledge to fully understand the issue and to document the potential fixes.
If you would be so kind as to explain, I will make sure it gets published in an obvious place for the community.
Thank you!

--

Components and SEF Fixes - please post what you know
Various popular components have varying degrees of advanced SEF compliance.
Many components have workarounds which have been used in the commercial advanced SEF.
Obviously a commercial developer is not going to share these with the community.

Please post fixes you are aware of in the http://www.xaneon.com/www.opensef.org forum.
Or PM them to me or Marko/Predator.
The faster we collect the info the faster OpenSEF will work well with various popular components.
Thanks to all.

---

Humor me, I'm slow.
Love the implication that this is some sort of support issue preventing SEF Advance from being open source . . . while we are all reading and posting in a huge open source community support forum.
Is it just me, or does that argument not hold water?

To minimize the impact of any potential support demand - I hereby offer to fully document and publish online any and all SEF Advance info on background, how-it-works, FAQ, set-up instructions, component work arounds, htaccess file fixes needed for same, etc., etc., etc.
Right after I receive it.
Obviously someone has already figured all this out. It is just not available to the open source community.

And the other issue, that there are mysterious technical limitations . . . which do not appear to stop a commercial product.
Again, I'm slow, please explain how that is a reason preventing open source.

We all have various opinions on this issue - I repeat mine.
SEF Advance is a stain on the reputation of this open source project.
If Miro was selling SEF Advance, people would be screaming.

---

Thanks to all the people who have already come forward with offers to help.
We are on our way.

---

Open Source Matters . . . even for SEF components.

For the love of god... you really dont read what people are writing are you Ken? If you are dissatisfied with the current implementation of SEO - which lacks functionality - please use some of the opensource stuff.. I use 404_SEF without a hitch and there loads of them out there that are free. So would please stop bashing ppl because they want to be paid for supporting a special version of SEF that couldn't be included.

Most of us, I would presume, that don't like the original SEO are free to make our own implementations of it, and have done so and dont feel like we have to bash someones head in because of it. OSM is open and you can do whatever you want with it.

I seriously doubt that you would be happier if they core developers would leave the core development team and just be doing commercial components instead of working on the core.

@ken
I am not sure whether there exists a complete solution somewhere (lost overview of the threads)...
In this thread: http://forum.mamboserver.com/showthread.php?t=17128
there is some information and especially in http://forum.mamboserver.com/showpost.p ... stcount=27 and http://forum.mamboserver.com/showpost.p ... stcount=29 I tried to explain a bit of the technical background.
The true solution should be as simple as calling the function getItemid at the right places (e.g. in the blog)... so that the non-SEF URL becomes unique.
The contract of the SEF-component ist to provide a non-ambiguous (not sure which word is the best translation here) reversible function to/from a SEF-link. A workaround breaks this contract. Asking the SEF-component for a SEF-link using a unique non-SEF link to the content is the solution. (using getItemid for exmple like described above).
(as far as I can tell getItemid is only suitable for content items... for links to categories, sections or others I were not able to think of a similiar function need to be implemented)


As for SEF advance... sure it would be nice to have it open source. But this should be a decision made by Saka himself. Btw. no one was screaming Miro selling support I believe. (But ok, emotions on the whole foundation subject sometimes lost the substance in my opinion)

@shadoe

I see your point, however, as I tried to explain in some previous post, the issue is not about Saka writing his own code, selling it and providing support for it, even paid support which I believe is no the case. That is perfectly OK, at least for me.

The issue that may exist is Saka holding back changes in the core in order to preserve this business.

Once again, my opinion is I don't see how anyone can prove it or prove the contrary, so let's stop talking about it. However [and this actually could prove the contrary!], let's lobby to have those changes made to the core ASAP. From de last post, I gather that those changes may not be so huge, or at least that a better solution that current could be worked out by "those who know".

@de : thanks for the info, will crawl through these threads

Best regards to both and all the others, here and there

I think Ken is right in most of his points. Proper SEF support should be part of the core. And no matter how much I think about it, I really can't see how performance issues can be an excuse of not implementing SEF in the core. First of all, very many users do use Advance SEF or another SEF component, and are happy (or at least satisfied) with the performance. Secondly, if it was built into our CMS and some people found it too slow, they could just turn it off.

The same can be said about technical reasons. If those technical obstacles are solved in one commercial product, they surely can be solved in an open source component too.

Ok, let's say they aren't fully solved and the author needs to spend a considerable time to support the clients. Well, that is what this forum is made for, right? We support each other. And faqs, how-to's etc. can minimize the support needed quite much.

Recently a Danish politician advocated for better conditions for motorcyclists. At the same time he drove around on an expensive bike that some major mc company had "lended" him for free. He couldn't see any problems here. It was not illegal. It was perhaps even not wrong. But there certainly was a conflict of interest, so he decided to give it back.

The whole point of the conception called "conflict of interest" is that while people never knows if anything is not as it should be, the mere suspicion is enough to make them feel uneasy. That is why it is wrong.

The same here. No one can tell the truth of why proper SEF support is not built into our cms. Saka's explanation is just as good as Ken's.

But to say that there is no conflict of interest is simply not true.

Ken,
I'm aware that there are several SEF components available, both free and commercial ones. But I was referring to built-in SEF. This is what I understand so far:

- Better SEF (as in having article title in the URL instead of item ID, etc) is not integrated in the core now because of the current database structure limitation
- Database structure will be changed in version 5.0, hence allowing for improved SEF
- Version 5.0 only runs in PHP5

Now, even when version 5 is still far away, I don't mind waiting if I know that I can get improved SEF. The problem is the statement saying that it runs only in PHP5. As of today, there are few hosting companies that runs PHP5 and I doubt they will switch soon. Does it mean us who run PHP4 have no hope of having an improved built-in SEF?


You're welcome

@battra

I am not aware of any core changes planned for the 4.5.x branch to incorporate advanced SEF capabilities. Obviously I am not a privy to the core dev team plans, so I only know what you know. From the stuff I have read, it does not appear likely to happen.

OpenSEF/XE2 appears to be the best opportunity for advanced SEF in the 4.x branch.

--

@ALL

Thanks to Arto over at Xaneon the OpenSEF.org web site is now live.
http://opensef.org
Please come over and register (the front-end mambo registration will register you for the forum)

Marko and I both have OpenSEF test sites running and we are testing various components.
We cannot test everything so, please try out XE2 Beta 2 and post your results.

Arto (the lead developer on XE2 from Xaneon) will be working on the Beta 3 release.
More on this later.

For now the Bug Tracker will remain on MamboForge
http://mamboforge.net/tracker/?atid=224 ... unc=browse

Anyone made some patches? Please contact us or post in MamboForge Patch Tracker
http://mamboforge.net/tracker/?atid=224 ... unc=browse


More is happening - will post announcements later.

Thanks to all for your input.


KM

Nothing much seems to be happening at http://opensef.org forum 

I've used that one before with a phpBB forum on the site, with phpBB 2.0.13 by Adam, the database hit was bad, my host was forced to shut me down for a while. I guess phpBB wasn't cut for it - or should it be the other way around.

Adam, i'll check 404SEF again with the latest port you've made, might post a report back at your forum.

Malibu, how's 404SEF so far?

I hope OpenSEF will be a good solution until the database will be restructured.

We still have not all access to every part of the site, much is currently done behind the scene due to the coding, so what you expect? 

There will come a solution so please be patient.

I have read through this post very quickly and while a decent url is good for search engines there is a greater value in GOOD CONTENT and links to your site.

SEO is not just about the url. There are so many more factors involved.

If the core team ever want any advice on the small things that could be done to improve your search engine optimisation then by all means let me know. I'm no expert but I do have my moments.