Joomla! Discussion Forums

I have been hearing about the recent changes at Joomla and I have a few concerns about the changes being discussed for commercial extensions i.e. requiring them to be open source so they can protect their work.

Over the past few months, I have downloaded free extensions and purchased commercial extensions and would like to share my experiences and concerns.

I am going to talk about some extensions, but won’t mention their names or what they were used for.


1. Security issues

A number of months back I downloaded a free extension through the extension directory and thought it was working great. A while back I checked the developer’s website to see if there was an upgrade and found the website had disappeared. I thought it was a bit unusual but thought nothing more of it.

A few weeks later I found out completely by accident that his extension had been pulled from the extension directory because of a major security breach. For months while I was thinking everything was great, there was security problem a hacker could drive a semi through. I immediately removed it.

However, when a commercial extension I purchased had a security problem, I was immediately notified. A week or so later I was asked to download a new upgrade. It not only provided fixed the security issue, but provided new bells and whistles. It was a great improvement.

The commercial developer had an investment in his product and was concerned about ensuring its quality was maintained. 

It looked liked the free developer ran for the hills. Quite frankly I don’t blame him, he was probably going to be inundated with questions and request and obviously didn’t have the time or the inclination to deal with the problem.


2. Product improvement

As you go through the extension’s directory there are a number of free extensions --  going by the comments -- that have serious problems with them and a number of them haven’t been upgraded for decades. I know this is an exaggeration, but most know what I am talking about.

However, a couple weeks back I got an email from a different commercial extension I had purchased. Different from the one referred to in point #1. He was asking if I had any comment or suggestions for improving the product.
When I bought it, I received a lifetime of free upgrades, and since I had been using his product for a few months, they were wondering what they could do to make the product better.

Again one has a vested interest in improving the product the other doesn’t.

Now don’t take it from these comments that all free extensions are bad. This is absolutely wrong. I use some great free extensions and I will mention these by name – Joomap and JCE Editor are two I use.

I installed Joomap a long time ago and was having a few problems making it work. I contacted the developer. He responded immediately, went to the website checked it over, made a few suggestions and in the end sent me an update. I almost felt guilty talking to him, because he was doing all this for nothing. He was a great guy. In the end, I found out it was me who was the problem, not the extension... Sigh. I have finally confessed.

JCE editor has been regularly improved and updated. It is has been a great program to work with and I highly recommend it. In their latest upgrade, I ran into a couple problems. When I checked back they already had the problem fixed. I loaded up the new program and it is working great with big improvements.

Unfortunately, with the free extension quality is hit and miss. With the commercial extensions my experience so far has only been positive.

3. My concern about fairness

I am very concerned about changing the rules half way through the game. When Joomla first started developers were told they could sell products and protect their investment by encrypting the code. Now after making this investment they are told the rules are being changed and the rug is being pulled out from underneath them. Unfortunately, it is being pulled out from underneath me as well. In all instances, I received or purchased lifetime upgrades on the commercial products. Without ability to protect their work, will these commercial developers continue to upgrade and improve their products? I am not sure.

Joomla is a great product because it has a great core, great selection of quality extensions and hundreds of templates. I have a friend who is working in Plone. I love bugging her and telling her all the things I am doing with Joomla. I have watched her struggle with what is generally looked upon as a good CMS program. Just recently she asked if I knew of any software that could transfer a website from Plone to Joomla. I am concerned when we are changing a game plan that has created in my opinion the best CMS program available. Having been involved with an organization that has spent thousands of dollars on professional development of two CMS systems, I know of what I speak.

4. A suggestion

I have always looked upon Joomla as a community. The Core group has certainly developed this mentality. Because of this I wonder if a referendum should be held on the issue where all registered members can express their view on this important issue. It doesn’t mean Core group has to abide by the vote, but it would certainly provide feed back on what our opinion is on this very important matter. It would certainly fall in line with the idea of community developed around Joomla.

I for one would vote in favour of commercial, encryption protected extensions.

5. Finally a word to commercial developers

I have purchased a number of commercial extensions. I have pulled out my wallet and sent you some money. I noticed that none of you had a line where I could make a donation to the Joomla core project. I admit I am cheap and have not made a donation to Joomla, but while I was purchasing your product I looked for a line where I could donate to Joomla while I already had my wallet out.

If Joomla is important to you, give your buyers an opportunity to donate. I am sure someone could develop a module that would send the donation straight to Joomla without going through your books.


Mad Dog

We're not going to be replying to every post in this section, but I feel some major clarification is important here.

The evaluation of the GPL license, which Joomla has always been under and only now is suggesting compliance in, has nothing to do with making money.

You can DEFINITELY charge money for extensions, and are encouraged to do so... but you must provide the source on any derived work when you distribute your extension.  The only files that need to be GPL are the ones that interact with Joomla, and the level to which that happens is currently under debate.


GPL does not mean free like in "free beer" it means free like in "free speech" ... you must be FREE to see the source code, and you must be FREE to make changes to it... and you must be FREE to improve upon it.  It is for the betterment of the community, and not its detriment.

This change to suggesting compliance in the GPL should actually improve support, as charging for access to a support forum is one way to generate an income stream. Another is to be sure that you provide better support than a developer who may have a similar product (based on the fact that a bunch of your source is open). 

I'm not an expert in development nor in Joomla security, but I have been in business and marketing for nearly 15 years... and I am not concerned about people intelligent enough to program extensions also figuring out ways to make sure they can generate income by leaving certain amounts of their extensions GPL while still maintaining a licensed package.

OSM has said "look, we're getting our websites compliant with the GPL because we were told we should by our lawyers.  We think you should probably do the same with your extensions, for your own good, based on what our lawyers tell us.  We'll help you make the transition."  (that's paraphrasing and not a direct quote)

I do not speak for anyone but myself... but I tried to remove as much opinion as possible and simply clarify some of your points so they do not spread misinformation about the change in license enforcement, its intent, etc.

Hi Mad Dog,

Thanks for posting. You make very valid points. I would like to reply to the following :



Joomla! is not changing the rules halfway since nothing has changed by the announcement we made. Joomla! has always been GPL without exceptions and will stay GPL. Let examine the situation a bit more closely to get a better understanding.

1. The Mambo Project

The original Mambo Project  - where Joomla! forked away from in 2005 - did indeed have a FAQ about the statement you are referring too.

In this FAQ the Mambo Project stated :

10. I have written a Component, Module, Template for Mambo. Do I have to release it under the GPL?

No The GPL allows you to write your own extensions for Mambo and to release those extensions under whatever license you chose. 

Their license FAQ's also stated :

2. Who owns the copyright to Mambo?

The copyright to Mambo is held by Miro International Pty Ltd. Miro were the original authors of Mambo and continue to actively support the project.

Because Miro owned the full copyrights they could make this statement, at least until version 4.5, after this version external GPL code was added for which they did not helt the copyrights. It could be argued that since Mambo 4.5.1 that statement is not valid any longer, but that's a whole other discussion.

2. Joomla

When Joomla! 1.0 was released on the 15th of september 2005 the project license policy was also changed, this happened in revision 74 of the SVN on the 15th september 2005. From that date forward every of the approx 3 million Joomla! packages downloaded from our website carried the following license information :

This website is powered by Joomla! The software and default templates on which it runs are Copyright 2005 Open Source Matters. All other content and data, including data entered into this website and templates added after installation, are copyrighted by their respective copyright owners.

If you want to distribute, copy or modify Joomla!, you are welcome to do so under the terms of the GNU General Public License. If you are unfamiliar with this license, you might want to read 'How To Apply These Terms To Your Program' and the 'GNU General Public License FAQ'.

This information can also be found on our main website and has not been changed since september 2005.

As you can see Joomla! never made the same statement as Mambo. For good reasons as Joomla! does not own the full copyrights over the codebase. It also does not pursue those rights. The Joomla! copyright policy says the following about this :

The Joomla! project does not aggregate the copyrights of its code contributors. No contributor is required to transfer his/her copyright to Joomla! and each individual contribution will forever remain in the ownership of its author. This also applies to translations of the Installation language set as these alone are included in the core release of Joomla!

Open Source Matters Inc., a not-for-profit organisation, holds the Joomla! project's assets and represents Joomla!'s legal matters. Joomla! project claims copyright over the total aggregated creation which is the CMS. This copyright is held by Open Source Matters Inc. This is why each file in the release is marked "Copyright - Open Source Matters Inc.". This does not violate the copyright and ownership of the individual contributions. These always remain the authors' property.

Attributions of the copyrights of contributors and other included code elements is detailed in the main copyright file in the root directory of the Joomla! installation.

As the contributors do not transfer copyright they instead declare that their code contributions are licensed to Open Source Matters Inc. in a limited and non-exclusive fashion. Limited meaning that Open Source Matters Inc. may only use their contribution if it is released under GNU/GPL for the entire Joomla! CMS (or GNU/LGPL in the specific case of the Joomla! Framework Libraries). Non-exclusive meaning that the contributors are free to do whatever they wish with their own creations including using it for their own releases under any licence they wish (including commercial).

Legaly this means that OSM does not have the ability to change or adapt the Joomla! license without consent of all the contributors.

I hope this helps to shed some light on this particular issue.

Johan

Edit : fixed various typos
Edit : linked to correct mambo license page