Joomla! Discussion Forums

From - http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... #msg890899


Yes, that's the technical side of the problem, but that's not the only issue here. Would the Joomla! team accept such work into the codebase? I've yet to see a straight answer to the question (feel free to point me to the right post on this if I've missed it). I get the sense there is more going on that just "honoring" the GPL. I'd be glad to be proven wrong, but the non-answer replies that Erick's thread (http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic,186865.0.html) is getting have not helped. A simple response from the team saying something like
would be enough. Then people who care about it could start working on figuring out the best approach to solve the problem.

Erick has posted a summary of his points here - http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... #msg891065. I look forward to seeing a clear response.

david

David, no one can make any such promise any more than they can promise that if you write an acl solution it will be accepted.

I'm assuming you are sincere. In that case, just write it and release it as a gpl core hack, just like jaclplus does for their acl solution.

In reply to: http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic,188029.0.html


If it is good work and does not get in the way of the future goals and direction of the project...

you can't ask them "will you accept this item I haven't written yet into your project?"

What if it has billions of errors or breaks major parts of the CMS?

If you want some idea to be accepted or be discussed you need to provide a proof of concept to them that they can evaluate.
They can't comment on vaporware.

And if you bothered to read any of Jinx' posts you would already have your answer in regards to would they be willing to LGPL the API in the future...

http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... #msg874511



If that doesn't say it all then I don't know what would say what you want other than: "Go ahead do whatever you want!" which is what some (not saying you) want to hear!


Erick hasn't listened to one word anyone has said.


No one has ever said officially that proprietary extentions weren't wanted. Only that they could be a GPL license violation. And that IS the status Quo...always has been!


This was always the case!


The technical solutions have been provided at least 50 times...Create an LGPL Bridge or take on the project of moving the API into a state that can be LGPLed...


The status Quo is and has always been that these proprietary extentions and licenses violate the GPL license of code J! uses! they could have been sued two years ago if the owners of those licenses saw fit to do it!


NOTHING HAS CHANGED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The same reality exists today that existed three years ago before Joomla was even invented!
This is not about attitude it is about the license! Keep focusing on the attitude and you will NEVER solve the issue of the license!


I suggest he read the link I provided!


again the attitude...Not the license...Now you know why your questions have gone unanswered...
You want a statement on an idea not a concept.
Make the concept (proof of) and submit it before you go asking for an opinion on something that doesn't exist!

Even if you got a "yes we would like that", you will still get turned down for inclusion if it is written poorly.
You want an opinion on something that doesn't exist. make it exist and submit it...that is how open source works.

If you ask me what this statement thing is all about is if you get some official statement that says we will LGPL the API at some point or entertain the notion of it, then I don't have to do anything at all just keep selling my proprietary project and if I get sued I can say in court Joomla said they would make me compliant and encouraged me to make proprietary product so go sue them instead!

Presumably a timezone issue, but some of the merged posts are out of sequence.

Asphyx and everyone - I have to apologise if you think that I'm not responding to all your points, but I'm trying to keep this thread around a single topic and felt I've gone off topic far too much myself.

Summary of my point:

• Until now, non-GPL extensions were wanted and welcome (the status quo)
• Currently extensions are seen as derivative works, and therefore must fall under the GPL
• The technical issue we are trying to solve is to adjust how the extensions connect to Joomla so that they are no longer considered derivative works of Joomla
• This will allow the proprietary extensions to remain under their current licenses (the status quo). If attitudes have not changed, this should be wanted and welcome
• If attitudes have changed, then it will be difficult to have the solution incorporated into the core code, or once there for it to be maintained.
• Therefore: A formal statement that this solution is wanted within the core team is necessary.
• If this attitude has changed within the community, it would be better to know now, rather than after the solution is made

Also the "inconvenient" facts from before:
- The core of Joomla is GPL, and that is not going to change to suit us
- The GPL is what it is, and is not going to change to suit us
- Some proprietary extensions are not GPL compatible, and that is not going to change to suit us

Everyone seems to assume that a solution requires some compromise - either breaking the GPL or relicensing the proprietary extensions using something GPL compatible. I don't believe thats true.

I'm not asking for some free pass to break the GPL or steal other peoples' works. Let us assume, to avoid these side arguments, that it is possible to come up with a solution that doesn't mean changing any of the inconvenient facts above. Oh and let us assume it is of good quality etc etc, and on technical merit is suitable for inclusion in the Joomla core. In fact let's assume every possible hoop and obstacle has been jumped through, except the last one: core team acceptance. If it doesn't fit in with the values and goals of the core team, then it isn't going in.

So the vital question is:

Do you want non-GPL extensions or not?

This has been addressed by Jinx. Re: Mixed Licensing

Still are! This isn't a determination about the worth of these past proprietary projects, merely a technical issue about how can you do this without violating the license. The fact that an attempt was made to allow these via a rider should tell you everything you need to know about the attitude of the developers towards P3PD development.  Were they all in agreement? Maybe not... it is hard for any group to ever be in 100% agreement on any issue. I believe (I certainly can not speak for them in a credible way) that most did (and do) not care if someone releases a proprietary extention for Joomla. I don't think there was ever a question as to whether these extentions were derivatives or not. It's quite obvious that most were. being a derivative is not the issue, using J! code in your proprietary work is not the issue merely a technicality. The issue at the heart of this is can Joomla get away with encouraging and supporting P3PD releases that violate the GPL license and not suffer the consequences of limiting the vast array of GPL code from being used in Joomla because of that support.
Unfortunatly the rider carried a price that when it was brought up and identified seemed to have too high of a price to pay for all just to accomodate such a small percentage of the developer population. That price was the possible issue of having to remove any GPL code being used in Joomla which to many (me being one of them) is the much greater loss than the availablility of the few proprietary extentions that existed.


First off they don't have to fall under the GPL...Lets be precise here they have to be COMPATIBLE (released under a compatible license) with the GPL. There is a pretty comprehensive list of NON-GPL licenses on the GNU site that can be used and are considered compatible with the GPL.
As to your point...
I would have to say this was always the case. And it is true for most extentions that work with J!...Are there exceptions? SURE! but Joomla/OSM doesn't have the resources or workforce to go through each extention, examine the code, see how it interacts with J! and then make a specific statement on each proprietary project. THIS is why the idea of consulting your own lawyer was suggested. If your project can be legally represented as NOT DERIVATIVE then the GPL derivative clause does not apply to your project and you are welcome to release it under any license you want.


CORRECT! this is a technical issue. which is why I keep saying that statements from Joomla/OSM can not solve these issues for P3PDs...Derivation is a technicality of the GPL. You get around a technicality by creating a technique for getting around that technicality. Not by demanding statements, forming Developer alliances to complain, sending FUD emails, using Scare Tactics, withdrawing support of your product or running to some other GPL product thinking that same GPL technicality doesn't exist because it hasn't come up on their forum yet.
There are technical solution available. Some involve a small change to business model, some involve a small change to how the program works and is released either via multi licensed released (LGPL bridge, Proprietary core) or via use of a standalone application that does not use the J! api at all or in a way that is not considered derivative. I have ideas on how to the the latter which I won't go into here...I have already commented on how to do the bridge option on other threads.


As I just said...Attitude can't change the technicality. It is a matter of operation not mindset that is at the heart of the problem here. The Joomla Devs (Jinx Specifically) has already stated that they are going to work towards a TECHNICAL solution in the drive towards V2.0, Has any P3PD signed on to help his own cause and help facilitate this faster? NO! They are being too self centered and only want to work on the code that makes them money not the project all that work is based on...it is THIS attitude that needs changing not the attitude of Joomla/OSM...
the situation before all of this was...Yes what your doing is probably illegal but I won't squeal on you. Many even thought that what was going on should not be illegal but they do not have the power to make it such. Not without paying a price. As I said in this case the price was too expensive. Joomla/OSM has said pretty much the same thing. They aren't going to be sticklers about this issue and force anyone else to become legal or to follow the letter of the law, and they will help those who do wish to become legal and safe from any action by anyone else not related to J! so that their contribution can remain OFFICIALLY supported by the community and project. There will be no use of force and no running to the authorities and lawyers to get people to comply. Smoking pot is illegal in the US. I disagree with that law and I see people smoking it all the time. I do not report them or try to stop them from breaking that law I don't agree with but I sure don't go around telling people hey that law should not be there go ahead and light up. In the same way Joomla/OSM does not feel right saying go ahead ignore that part of the GPL law we disagree with and encourage what some consider illegal behavior. That is a personal choice you have to make yourself and if anyone encourages you they too could pay the price for your transgression.
There are many Mob Bosses in Jail for doing the same kind of thing. They don't actually commit murder but they encourage others to do it. they are considered by the courts to be just as much responsible as the guy who pulled the trigger...Joomla can not allow itself to be brought into your breach of law as they do not sell product and don't have the revenue stream a proprietary developer has to defend itself...

Your last three point all talk again to attitude which I have already said many times is not the issue so I won't comment on them further...It's a technical issue not a mindset at the heart of the problem.


Only the P3PDs have said this...It is their stubborn attitude and refusal to compromise that leaves them just those two choices...
Other options they have turned down:
1 - LGPL Bridging of extentions.
2 - Joining the project to help get the API/CORE seperation needed for V2.0 that will allow a more flexible licensing system for J! that will in turn allow a more flexible licensing choice for extentions that use that API.
3 - Getting legal counsel to determine if their project is in fact a derivative and must change the license
4 - Finding a GPL compatible license that meets their needs.
5 - Changing their business model so that the same money can be made no matter what license (GPL or not) the project is released under.
6 - (hardly discussed) creating or changing your license to make it compatible with the GPL while still providing you exclusivity of distribution to your version of the code. this would allow others to modify and release those modifications but deny distribution without first modifying the code. I believe you could make this license (if you wanted to) and create a new license that GNU might say is compatible with the GPL if written correctly and addressed their requirements of what is compatible with GPL.

The problem is that the P3PDs want Joomla to do all the compromising so they don't have to. why should anyone accomodate them when they sure do not want to accomodate anyone without pay...It is this selfish attitude I believe that needs the changing and it is this attitude that has left them very few choices. "You want what I have, you have to pay me." "I want what you have but I want it for free...without any work or cost to me"...Very selfish if you ask me...

Not all P3PDs have shown this attitude mind you...I'm not even sure that the ones that have constitute a majority of P3PDs who offer products for use in J!....Could just be a very vocal Minority!


If you want a direct answer from the community...
My answer is no! I don't use them or need them!

Let me ask you...
do you think Joomla NEEDS them? I sure don't!
They aren't written any better than the GPL stuff, Can't be fixed by the user like the GPL stuff, Can't identify security holes and fix them like you can with the GPL stuff and when they get abandoned they are abandoned for good where as a GPL offerring can rise like a phoenix from the ashes and be brought back to life as new and improved....You want to see an example of that look no further than Joomla itself...

Mambo was for all intents and purposes a dead proprietary project that did little for the end user because the features just weren't there. When it was released to the GPL so that anyone could develop it further it has grown to the status it is at today. (as both Joomla and Mambo)
Most proprietary extentions are the same as they were when they were first released...bug fixes maybe have been added and some minor tweaks for compatability purposes may have been made but for the most part these program do no more than they did from the start. Not the case with the GPL releases because if you want your project to be used you have to keep adding features to keep up with the features someone else added to it.

GPL is there to encourage community contribution to code. since mnore people can contribute more features get made. what I would support is a new licensing that would allow P3PDs to keep exclusivity of just their version but allow new versions to be created and added to by the community.
And I'm willing to bet it could be done and accepted by GNU as a compatible license if done correctly...

As I said before the P3PDs will have to do these things for themselves...Instead of insisting Joomla change their license to suit them they should try to change their license to suit GNU and the FSF inregards to what is compatible in a way that allows them to keep their current business model.

Sorry, how is that addressed if the following reply from other core members undermines it? If it isn't a commonly shared goal to achieve the level of de-coupling necessary to allow for proprietary extensions without them being considered derivative works of Joomla, then it is an interesting goal which is orthogonal to my question.

severdia: "is this a message to 3PDs wanting to maintain their development model to hold out on Joomla until v2"

[quote="Louis Landry"]
No, it is not.

http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... #msg877340

It is not a veiled message, just a statement of intent and vision that we have had.

Just because a part of a GPL application is LGPL does mean interfacing with the LGPL changes the game.  The code is still part of the greater compiled and executed application which is GPL.
[/quote]

and

[quote="Louis Landry"]
It might be misleading to state that if the framework is LGPL then all issues are resolved.  It is still all one application that is running which is GPL.  As a standalone application running on the framework (if/when the framework is LGPL)  there would be no issue at all, but there is much more to something be a derived work then simply using an API or not
[/quote]

Now I can see the distinction Louis is making here, and it's a completely fair point. Closely coupled extensions will be derivative works even if you put a layer in-between. Such P3PDs need to get their house in order, no question. I'm not trying to make out Louis is anti-proprietary - he's made his position fairly clear early on in this thread. But it would be helpful if we could get a clear core team consensus on the question.

No one anywhere can read minds and know what every 3PD is going to code in the future and whether it is going to infringe or not.  That would be impossible to do.  Without seeing the actual code of any given extensions no one can make a determination as to whether it is a derivative or not.  That is why there are no blanket statements.

They have stated the vision.  They have stated the intent.  They have made the vision and the intent clear, and they are asking 3PDs for their help in coming up with solutions. .  Louis's reply does not negate or undermine Johan's reply, in fact I think it actually supports and adds more detail to what Johan said.

So the answer of the Joomla team is: Yes, we do want to allow for proprietary extensions.

Thank you.

Now I can get on with the technical problem, as Asphyx so well said - it's where our efforts should be focused.

In response to Asphyx's post....

http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic,190870.0.html



Really...then why did I buy many commercial extensions after checking out many GPL extensions? Perhaps because as an end user they met my needs far better and I felt (despite lacking the knowledge) that they performed and were coded better.


Fixed by who? I'm not a coder and and am more than happy to pay for the expertise of someone talented enough to develop a commercial extension.


See above...as an end user I reply on the expertise and talent of others, I freely admit that. I not only am willing to pay, I also donate to many GPL extensions to recognise and acknowledge that talent....I have no issue with doing either!

I've also found that many of those developing commercial extensions have tremendous commitment to their customers and their products and fix issues quickly.


Or if it is worth it, some enterprising person might negotiate to buy the code and continue the development? I think your comment is a gross generalisation. I should also point out I am more than happy to take the risk when buying a commercial extension. It is the same risk I take every time I buy any commercial product....and never asked for any protection from that process.

Cheers,

Phil

In reply to Phil-Roy
from: http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic,190912.0.html


Why ask me why you bought them...did you buy VBulletin instead of SMF which does as much AND MORE than VBull?
They met your needs because you obviously didn't have the skills to add to the code or needed support most of us do not need.
you name the Proprietary components you have paid for and I will find GPL alternatives that do as much and more!


That sounds like a personal problem not something that Joomla or it's developers are required to or needs to solve.


But you are presuming you NEED to pay to get that expertise...I'm a joomla hero and I didn't make all those posts by not offerring my expertise to end users such as yourself for free. Where did I get this expertise that I have you might ask?
By looking at and learning the code I am using and bettering myself to see what actually works, how it works and looking for ways to improve it. Not possible for you to do with an encrypted proprietary product. You can't learn how that product does because you don't have access to that code and if you did you might not be so dependent on other people to code things for you.
No one is saying you don't have a right to use or pay for the use of someone else's expertise all I am commenting on is that there is this MYTH that Proprietary are written better than GPL...And for someone who claims to not know code I find it rather funny that in your NON-EXPERT opinion you felt the need to say proprietary code is better and meets your needs better than GPL.
If you really believe that then you need to go buy yourself a proprietary CMS since (as you are trying to assert) GPL is written so badly....Joomla is not written badly and it is GPL. It would not have been possible to make Joomla as good as it is if it were not GPL and instead proprietary., As I stated in my post that you replied to...As a proprietarry project (Mambo) was dead! Deader than a doorknob! It only lives today in both it's forms (Mambo and Joomla) because of the GPL...


Name one instance where this has happened!
Point is no one is going to buy a code they have never seen and try to make it better.
What is more likely is they will simply start off from scratch making a completely incompatible product that does the same thing. It's cheaper to do it that way. But with GPL if a project dies and then gets ressurected it is easy for anyone still using the dead product and easy for whoever picks it up to convert the old data to work with the new incarnation...

My comment may have seemed like a gross generalization to you...
But most developers know there really isn't much difference in quality between GPL and Proprietary. Show me on Proprietary CMS that has all the features that Joomla, Drupal or Typo3 have....
Name one extention that has far more functionality and much fewer bugs than a GPL counterpart...

As for making generalized non applicable statements the statement that Proprietary software is better is about the worst generalization you can make...
Falls far short of the truth and in many cases is an out and out lie!

If you truly feel that GPL creates bad product then you should not be concerned about having to use GPL extentions in a GPL program...
You should be looking for a Proprietary CMS with proprietary Extentions since that is what you have determned fits your needs and meets you MUST PAY confidence level.

For an end user such as yourslef who need to rely on the expertise of others I will attempt to put this into your perspective...
With proprietary software you have to rely on a single proprietor...
With GPL software you can rely on the entire community for your expertise.

With proprietary software all bug and compatibility fixes must come froma  single source...
With GPL software the entire world can open the file, make some changes and release that change to you as soon as it is made.

If you ask me the inexperienced should more inclined to support the GPL for code they use as they get an entire community worth of experts to support them as opposed to one overworked developer who only has 24 hours in a day to get something done...
In the GPL sphere of existence if 100 people work on that problem they have 2400 hours to fix the problem...

Asphyx,

I'd love to reply, but it is ridiculous for you and I to be chatting via two separate threads, so I'm not going to at this stage.

Phil

http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... 03966.html

1. Tags
2. Mossets Tree or Phils directory
3. Jomres
etc...

ok, go ahead...


So you're the community..?
MY answer is: I don't care what license they come under, as loong as they work.

In the rest of your two posts, you're mixing up commercial non-GPL with encrypted, which most are not.
Also, you make it look like all of those CNG (short for commercial non-GPL, tired of repeating) are coded by "one overworked developer", which is simply not the case.
Also, phil never stated that "generalized non applicable statements the statement that Proprietary software is better", he said "why did I buy many commercial extensions after checking out many GPL extensions", this was not a question to you but rhetorical, he answered himself.
Also you're assuming everyone has the time, willingness and ability to understand code, which is simply not the case; many users just want a system that works and allows them to use the functionality they request from their site. Used to be "power in simplicity"..
Also it is easy to come up with CNG CMSes with more features than Joomla, which only provides basic functionality and as the core said often enough, as examples for 3PDs to build more powerfull and better extensions from. Joomlas power is in it's extensibility and ease of usage (for end users) of the extensions, no matter if $$ or not.
Also you fail to see that "in the GPL sphere of existence", as is ppointed out day after day, all are unpaid volunteers with regular jobs, whilst most CNG extension dev's do this full time as their job!
If you've seen 300: just the same why 300 spartians (professional soldiers) could easily cope with thousands of less well-trained men... (don't go jumping on this implying I mean 3PDs code better than core dev's or something I along those thoughts!)
also also also.. you made better posts than this one lately.

And to support eyezberg (this discussion now spans 3 threads!) I also believe that sometimes commercial success/products actually breeds GPL equivalents that benefit everyone.

Phil

Joe you still here?
I remember a threat or something to that fact that you were leaving....

Was it empty or merely another tantrum hoping someone would jump for you?

Anyway you came up with a whole THREE projects....Of how many that are on the extentions directory?
Well over 1800 I'm sure...Are there any comparable Proprietary versions of community bulder?
How about a good commercial SEF component? Most people were using OpenSEF which was GPL.
And I have never run the ETC Extention...what does that one do?

I will say those products you mentioned are very good ones...Worth paying for...Probably exist because no one had made a project that does those things under the GPL and therefore found their niche market! are they written better than they could be under GPL? I don't know..I DO know that they would probably have 20 more features by now if they were...

And I should note that Phil Taylor's projects has been identified by Phil as incompatible with J! 1.5
Will he be porting them over to 1.5 even if Proprietary license was legal? Long before this issue ever came up he said he had no intentions of doing so. so it really didn't matter what Joomla said about proprietary that is pretty much a slew of dead proprietary projects after 1.5 is stable now isn't it? you might be able to use them but none of the features of 1.5. If it was GPL then anyone could do the work Phil is refusing to do so that users like Phil-Roy would have the option of using it. Which I believe will address some of your other statements in regards to how much a proprietary developer can do that a GPL can't due to his supreme excess of time available and professionality...


And your assertion that I am confusing commercial with proprietary is well off it's mark.
you are not allowed to modify 99% of all proprietary NON-GPL code that exists. Can't modify encrypted GPL either but those projects are still allowed to be sold and licensed the way they are. there is no issue with them and they do not apply to this subject at all! A simple request of the source and these commercial GPL are modifyable as well!


Right becuase no one is making a buck off your work!
If I should take a site you made and simply use all the graphics from it to make my own site would you have any issue with my derivative site?
Bet you would! Joomla hasn't taken issue with these folks however. Merely notified them that Joomla as a project can't do anything to try and legalize the use of Proprietary license with GPL derived code. They will have to solve theor own problems in regard to violating GPL themselves...they have all the time as you say though to work on that...as soon as they stop the FUD and complaining....

And note I said MY answer not the COMMUNITY's Answer...

I said and I quote:

A Direct answer from ME! Others can answer how they want! I never once claimed to speak for the community a crime you have been gulilty of many many times in the past. I'm not the one who has spouted prophesy about the IMPENDING demise of Joomla each time some subject or issue you don't like comes up!


No Joe you are mixing these up yourself...you are assuming that the issue at hand has to do with COMMERCIAL of any kind which is not ,has not and never will be the issue. To say it is, is simply more FUD on your part trying to scare even more people into believing that this means no one can make any money off joomla under any circumstances! proprietary licenses do not allow modification (in most cases). Commercial GPL in many cases also encrypt but you can get the souce and remove that encryption. Not possible with Proprietary. with most proprietary they deny you the right to support if you do modify. Note I'm not making generalizations in this regard like the death of Joomla crowd does in saying that all GPL is written badly compared to GPL...Each developer has their own way of doing things and I certainly do not intend to lump all in a group as the grumps have tried to do in scaring others into thinking that Users can be prosecuted or they will be denied use of their purchases or claim that all GPL developers are amateurs who don't know what they are doing because they volunteer as opposed to charging for their work. Which takes us to this next beauty of a statement by you...



Those regular jobs are for the most part AS PROGRAMMERS!!!!!
Sorry to burst your bubble Joe but these Proprietary developers all have other jobs outside what piittance they make selling Joomla Extentions too...Unless someone has sold over a 10,000 copies of an extention they would have been evicted long ago if they didn't! This is more generalization on your part.
It's just a rediculous statement because if these folks have all the time in the world to make product why is it the volunteers make the majority of the codes and API these add ons use and they can't make their product without that work being done first? Why don't they make stand alone products which would open up their markets to a hell of a lot more than just Joomla users? IF they wanted they could create bridges for their product to integrate the same way Coppermine, Gallery2 and SMF do for their standalone products!  If they have all this time to dedicate to their project and their wallet then they should put the time to use in making a product that is legal to make proprietary and doesn't need Joomla API or GPL derived code to work. Not busy sending out FUD emails or complainig about how someone else chose to license their product! They should instead get to work and find solutions for their issues instead of being lazy and aggitating to get Joomla to do their job for them! I have bought proprietary extentions before and I can tell you from experience none of those extentions has added a single feature in 2 years time to date! I do however get regular security patches and bug fixes but that has more to do with my choice of developer than the fact I paid him for his product. Just as I get regular patches and security updates for Joomla and the other GPL components and extentions I use. This notion that GPL means no support is a fallacy. No P3PD product has better support than GPL Joomla!

Sure Joomla is extensible...It is also pretty damn stable...When something changes that breaks a program the GPL stuff all has easy fixes posted right away, yet the Proprietary stuff sometimes takes weeks or months to get working...You know this and maybe you simply don't want to admit it.
Goes against your Joomla is dying point of view!


Ahhh Revisionist history...Movie Fantasy...This may be at the core of your attitude problems towards this project. Your very willing to believe any spectacle put on to titilate you but never bother to check the facts when you base your statements on them. If you knew History you would know that those 300 spartans had over 4000 other troops that were there with them, And I'm not even counting the Greek Navy that kept the majority of the forces aligned against them from getting there!....1000 Greeks were with them on the day of that "Last Stand" and no one really tells that part of the history becauyse it doesn't make the spartans sound as heroic. My guess is the same thing is happening here trying to make proprietary developers and their work the heros of Joomla and the reason it is a success! you should note the 300 (and the 1000 that were there with them) all died in a useless cause....If they hope to make their last stand with no other weapon but mud throwing and idle threats then proprietary development will surely die....
Joomla however will live on, 10,000 strong like the persians!


These guys are so smart (and some REALLY are!) but often they have to come to those lowly GPL coders of Joomla to figure out how to do something they want to charge you for doing. the guys who make Joomla all have other Jobs coding as well...They are just as PROFESSIONAL as someone who charges you for the priviledge of using their work! they are volunteers for JOOMLA but I'm sure they also pay the rent via taking coding jobs to pay the way. But I guess any chance to smear and demean the folks who bring us Joomla is taken advantage of isn't it? Not all P3PDs are complaining...
And you will note that in my other posts I believe this is a very vocal minority that is complaining...others are doing the right thing and just getting to work, making their proprietary projects compliant.

It is the complainers and the few ignorant folk who purported this myth that Proprietary means better!
It's a ruse to make you think that Joomla won't do anything well unless you pay them off...

Sort of like the old protection schemes run by the Mob in the 20's and 30's


Note to Mods: I know I am walking the swords edge on this post so feel free to cut out any parts (or the entire Post) if you deem it necessary!

Phil it's actually the opposite...
AkoComments was a GPL comment component for Joomla...for awhile it was the only one around...
Jom-Comment came out much later...

Jom-Res (which Joe also mentioned) was inspired by projects such as GigCalendar and Event Cal...

the Developers could have just as easily made those projects better by coding from them...They couldn't make any money doing that so created their own projects because in those few cases it seemed easy to beat what they had...

That is the usual path to Proprietary....find something that is GPL, see how it does it and then try to improve on it for a profit.

And I will point out the reason that we have to post like this is because some people [Mod edit:  no personal attacks. - MMMedia] have abused the freedom of the regular discussion forums to spread lies and misinformation in the name of their cause.

And replies like mine [edit] (which is also quite distasteful in many aspects I freely admit!) is another reason.

We need to stop with the FUD and get with the facts...
Fact 1 - proprietary aren't written any better than GPL
Fact 2 - Joomla/OSM has not said you can't sell proprietary code only that they can not do anything to legalize that practice.
Fact 3 - GPL has produced projects such as Joomla, Mambo, Drupal, Typo3, Linux, and many many other who do far more and work better than most proprietary alternatives or extentions that you can find that add to those systems.
Fact 4 - If it is important for these developers to make some money and they are very good at what they do then maybe they should expand their operations to MORE than just Joomla add ons and work to make a system that not only will make them money but they can license and release extentions under any license they see fit to use. They won't or are unwilling which says to me that maybe they aren't as good at this programming business as people make them out to be! If they were they wouldn't be crying over spilt GPL they would be making products that do not need GPL and do not need any other program written by anyone else but them to operate!
Fact 5 - It is the GPL that is denying them the right to release Joomla product under a proprietary license...NOT JOOMLA!

I appreciate the consideration but perhaps in the future it would be wise to refrain from posting anything that you feel might require editing based on the rules.  It would certainly save us all a lot of time.

I will leave this thread open and unedited should Joe decide to respond.  If it gets out of hand further, it will be locked.  If the two of you wish to hash this out with personal attacks, please do it off of the forum.

3 threads on this topic have now been merged into the original thread. 

No, it wasn't. It was inspired by a conversation with a local hotel owner and many many many feature requests.

Please asphyx. You used be interesting reading but the stuff you've posted in the last few days about P3PDs has been so wide of the mark it's going to take a shift of polar ice caps to get them on track. Seriously, you're going to give yourself a coronary so please take the time to chill a little.

The question of this thread has been answered by MMMedia, quoting a statement Jinx and a further statement (apparently in support) from Louis. The answer from the core team is:

Yes, we do want to support non-GPL extensions.

It is a crying shame for the Joomla community that noone could just come out and say "YES!" to this question. It wasn't a trick question. This hesitation in making a clear statement meant that more public comments such as this from Dean Marshall were fair and true, and are (rightly) damaging to Joomla:

[quote="Dean Marshall"]
The evasion in [this] thread is remarkable.  I don't think many impartial end users could read that and conclude that Team Joomla want to find an accommodation
[/quote]

If a member of the core team could step forward (at their convenience) and validate the answer I have stated on their behalf (or contradict it, if you wish), I would greatly appreciate it, as this would remove any remaining doubt from peoples' minds and let us move forward.

Thank you.

I just wanted to comment for the record that I don't think there has ever been any debate about this particular subject.  I don't think there is a question about the Joomla project not wanting to support companies that write non-gpl extentions, but the legality of it to do so, based on the way things are coded and licensed.  If they didn't want to support non GPL software, don't you think they would have disallowed it from Joomla's inception?

What they would like to do personally and legally are many times very different.

In the interim, the core team has made it clear that legally there are certain things they can not support regarding software that extends Joomla functionality with 1.5, and can not protect those people / companies if a legitimate copyright holder were to call them on their licensing.

Is this so difficult?

The Joomla team thought at one time that non GPL software would be fine.  After some serious research, they found out that it may not be, and their official stance needed to reflect that.  What would you have rather had;  Joomla to continue on it's merry way until a copyright holder lawyered up and started challenging all non GPL code?

This isn't an issue isolated to Joomla alone.  They just happened to believe that sticking to their ideals was more important than appeasing people, knowing the consequences.  It's indeed a rare thing these days.  Joomla has gone to an extreme for your protection just as much as theirs. You are now developing with a clear understanding of what could happen if you have non GPL compliant software.  The consequences, in all fairness, could have happened even with the rider in place.

Everyone suffers from this in some way; whether it be the 3PD, the user, even the team!  We're all affected.  The best way to deal with it is to stop debating how Joomla's stance is wrong, and start figuring out how we're all going to move forward in light of what has already been decided.

Merging.

Edit:  Merged all relevant posts together.

Do you WANT non-GPL extensions? Maybe the name of Joomla's non-profit organization missed your desk. It isn't "All Software Matters" or "We Want To Promote ALL Software".

This isn't a propaganda battle. The Joomla team has sought legal advice and presented their findings to the community. They recommend that you seek your own legal advice if you feel this information threatens you or you business. Do you feel threatened? I don't.

There are some excellent commercial extensions available for Joomla and I believe that the Extensions Directory does the right thing by listing them as such. The oft-quoted document recently released by the core team regarding derivative works and their questionable legal status is a warning to users and developers that they should be thinking about this issue. Until someone actually takes it to court in the country you live in you will never know if the question warrants all of this debate. The important thing right now to notice is that Joomla is getting the message out and that people are thinking about it. Kind of like looking both ways before crossing the street.

Perhaps a better topic for debate is "What is it about Open-Source Software that brought you here?" I sure hope that we can get our old friends Peter Lamont and Ric Shreves involved in this discussion.

Rogue4Angel: There hasn't been any debate on this issue, which is why I asked this particular question. In my opinion it's the "elephant in the living room" issue at the heart of why the arguments are so heated. The Joomla community is broad, there is no doubt it contains members who consider proprietary software the epitome of evil AND it also those who are trying to rip off all the good works and sell them as their own. I have no problem with that - in fact I think it's the wide variety of members that makes the community rich and vibrant, and one of the reasons that Joomla is so great.

I believe that this  issue has been seen as an opportunity by some people to attack other members of the community whose attitudes are different from their own - perhaps as an attempt to reform the community to contain only the members whose values are similar. In my view (and admittedly I didn't read all the later posts in the previous threads) this behaviour wasn't curbed by the moderators, and after the forum lock-down it was more clearly encouraged and participated in by moderators, giving the impression that the Joomla community is now hostile to proprietary 3PDs. So, yes, I think there was a question over whether the Joomla project wanted to support companies that write non-gpl extensions, and that needed clearing up to calm things down a little.

I fully understand that the legal situation prevents giving a "green light" to all proprietary extensions past-present-and future. Some are clearly OK, some can never be so, and some can change one way or another. Which is why I carefully chose a question that was to one side of the legal and technical discussions, something that we could agree on in principle regardless, but in some way defined what we believe as a community - even if an individual thinks that proprietary developers are evil they would then tolerate them because the community they love consider them do be part of the community. I didn't think it would be that hard to answer.

I appreciate that the core team might be in a legal bind that is making them give statements that they would prefer not to, it's not difficult for me to understand that the core team are in a difficult position and are moving forward as best they can. They are rightly distancing themselves from the proprietary community at the moment, but until recently there has been no mention that this trend would ever be reversed (or that anyone wanted to reverse it).

I'm not trying to make it harder than it already is, but I'm trying to prevent us cutting off our arm just because we have something seriously wrong with our elbow.


gsbe: I don't see where your coming from - are you contradicting the statement that "Yes, we do want to support non-GPL extensions"? Wanting to promote open software doesn't mean wanting to prevent closed software - it's about creating a positive force and directing guidance towards the best common good, not the witch hunting of things that are less good.

The legal advice received by the Joomla team and their announcements were necessary acts. The expected follow up is a statement that from the team that they would like to resolve the issue, but due to time constraints this effort would have to come from the community. Failing that, at least some effort to make certain members of the community aware that this legal issue doesn't mean it is "fair game" on proprietary developers would have been welcome. There was an absence of guidance by the core team, and people filled it with their own opinions to the detriment of everyone. It was an opportunity to get people (like myself) actively involved in Joomla, rather than passive recipients. I never realised that the Joomla community was so fragile and prone to fracture.

And while I appreciate you'd prefer a different topic for debate, the "topic" here was "So do you want non-GPL extensions or not?". Regardless of all the responses as if it was a different question, the question was simple, clear, and what it was. And we have an answer to that question, I think. If you wish to contradict that answer, please say.

There actually was constructive conversation on this issue, but unfortunately it got lost in the noise a long, long time ago.  I am glad to see some constructive dialog happening on solutions erickendrick.  Thank you for bringing the dialog around.

Asphyx, still posting those endless posts no-one (except me?) ever bothers reading?
It was not a threat to leave, who would feel threatened? It was a personal decision not to post anymore untill the situation clears, and I post about once a week currently, only when something really wrong gets posted.

And you failed to provide GPL equivlents for any of them, as you said you would.. I can post more if you want, these were just examples.
wrong, as long as you don't distribute it you are.
A crime? funny.. Whenever I posted something here as comming from some community, it was a summary of requests and questions posted by non-english speakers on the french forums. All the rest has always been, is and will be my very own opinion. I'm no lemming...
Where did I ever say that? Scare people?? even funnier..
No-one said that I think, would be wrong. I have myself provided a lot of support for some GPL thingy called Mambo, then Joomla
That was not the point, the point is the time one can invest when doing this as unpaid volunteer besides another job, and a fulltime job only coding on the extension(s).
Never said that, never thought that, I think it's management is not acting as well as it could in handling the mess they started, and are damaging the project and the end-users of it. Doesn't have to mean it will die. Could be in better health though..
This reference was only to the movie, not to history, as an example of people doing something as their job can invest more time and energy. Same as getting your car fixed by your neighbour vs by the garage you bought it from: if it breaks down, whatcha gonna do? Hey, I fixed it for free, now sort it out yourself, if you wanted insurance on the work, get a paid job done.. just another example, no need to rip apart the words, for ONCE, try to understand the meaning and message..?!
Where did I do that? please quote. After you posted the GPL examples you said you would.
Nonsense. Just because someone said these extensions are derivatives, which is yet to be proven (in court), it is the right thing? Nonsense.
Who ever said where that Proprietary is better? please quote & link. All I said is, some of the CNG extensions fullfil a need for certain sites Joomla doesn't, and no GPL extension does either -back to the 3 examples above. One more: iJoomla.

I have no cause, except better communication. This is why I bother replying here. Even though not in a way that'll make you want to communicate better..

Now you have said I am threatening, scaring people, am guilty of a crime, alluded I intend to revision history (as you quoted me), smear and demean folks, called me complainer and ignorant, said I abused the freedom of regular discussion (where is that freedom, can't even reply in the thread my post was moved to..). Are you feeling better now? Fine. I don't care, as nothing of this has an ounce of truth. Now either remove the part about lies and misinformation from your post, or I will need to report your post. Thanks. And then maybe follow Vince's advice and chill, it might really get to you some day...

Merged eyezberg's thread with the original topic.

This is the only part I am going to address.  You cannot modify code that is encrypted.  Please don't try to pretend that you can.  That is the impression you are giving.  That people can customize the encrypted extensions they get from proprietary vendors.  The plain and simple truth is you can't.  And if you have a problem, and the vendor isn't there to help you, you can't go to someone else to fix it, because the code is ENCRYPTED. And you can't get your money back, (I have removed wall of shame posts regarding this exact situations more times than I really would like to count).

Please don't give the impression that there aren't problems with proprietary extensions, and that people can customize them like they can GPL true OPEN SOURCE extensions.  It isn't the same and you know that is a fact.  Please be honest about this Joe.

[quote="MMMedia"]This is the only part I am going to address.  You cannot modify code that is encrypted.  Please don't try to pretend that you can.  That is the impression you are giving.  That people can customize the encrypted extensions they get from proprietary vendors.  The plain and simple truth is you can't.  And if you have a problem, and the vendor isn't there to help you, you can't go to someone else to fix it, because the code is ENCRYPTED. And you can't get your money back, (I have removed wall of shame posts regarding this exact situations more times than I really would like to count).

Please don't give the impression that there aren't problems with proprietary extensions, and that people can customize them like they can GPL true OPEN SOURCE extensions.  It isn't the same and you know that is a fact.  Please be honest about this Joe.[/quote]
Jenny, now you are confusing what I say. I am not talking about encrypted extensions, who are few, and largely unobfuscated, and which I have myself spoken against somewhere in the death thread. I am just talking about commercial non-GPL extensions. Nowhere in my posts did I say encrypted can be modified, did I? (to lazy to re-read). I am also not trying to pretend there are no problems with CNG extensions, there are problems with Joomla, GPL extensions, non GPL extensions, Windows etc etc, it's software. Does proprietary == encrypted in english? Then I would need to rephrase as I don't know this word so well, to me it just meant "owned by someone".. will look it up.

Quoting MMMedia....


Please also don't give the impression that all proprietary extensions fall under the same umbrella and can't be customised, when in fact many of the developers of these extensions allow it and even provide support and guidance on changes that an individual user might need to make.

Phil