Joomla! Discussion Forums

Enforce??? I think you need to read the GPL announcement again, as well as the GPL license itself, you are taking things out of context and deliberately mis-quoting.

*Sigh*
Trijnie, if Joomla is not for you, why are you expending so much energy on this subject?


Back to the topic at hand...

If SMF are not willing to support Joomla, that is their choice, there is plenty of other good forum software out there.. some of it pure GPL. Imagine the possibilities if you hardly needed a bridge, but rather a proper integrated solution was available. Joomla users would flock to that... honestly.. the world is not ending.

More to the point, if SMF are not willing to support Joomla, they will loose a huge potential userbase. Most users find SMF VIA Joomla and not the other way around.

They also said this:

"...For those who wonder why we have had to come to such a decision, we have had input from both the Joomla! project and the FSF directly, and it is the stance of both Joomla! and the FSF that the use of a bridge into a GPL-licensed system constitutes the creation of a combined work...."

Time to move on...if SMF us gone so be it!

She may have linked to your post TJay but it is me who talked about MAmbo's interpretations and what their interpretation truly means...

Funny how we shouldn't make statements as to how people interpret their license but yet it's fine for Mambo to interpret someone else's license and make allowances that were never made...

Point is if Mambo wanted to allow proprietary extentions their own license says they should have used the LGPL not the GPL.

They didn't and there has to be a damn good reason for that. I was just curious if she could come up with one!

Sounds to me like someone doesn't want the fact that moving to Mambo gets a P3PD nothing they don't already have here...


Right and Mambo is a GPL Licensed product! So how is it any different?
What protection do they have that some GPL copyright holder of code that Mambo uses won't also sue them?

Reading the Mambo License Guidelines: http://mambo-foundation.org/content/view/12/8/
specifically


So obviously Joomlas take on the gplv2 is not the same as say Mambo, e107, php-fusion, xoops or (insert any other gpl cms.)

This is what I do not understand.

Harry,
I am well known to the SMF team, have access to their private forum, and even development releases, admin a large SMF forum (this one) and not once did they attempt to make contact with me...

Read into that what you will.

I think what you will find it that their 'input' was from a forum thread here on these forums... dunno.. that is just my guess. Maybe they took advice from Mambo as coming from Joomla.. dunno... In any case.. life goes on, our users will find solutions that may turn out to be even better...

FYI This is not the first 'over reaction' from SMF.. remember the 1.5 Bridge issue where they announced it was not possible.. until Johan/Louis (I think) provided they with the solution, they were adamant that it was not possible.

Actuallly, Orstio was talking with me during this time, so, I'm very well aware of Joomla!'s involvement.

The last discussion between Orstio and Johan was on June 17. At that time both Orstio and Johan believed there was a working plan to build the bridge. Johan offered to have the plan reviewed by the SFLC to be "100% certain."

There has been no other contact that I know of since that time. I encouraged Orstio to return to talk to Joomla! if he had new questions or issues so that those could be resolved. To my knowledge, that did not take place. 

I understand if SMF decides not to continue forward. Not everyone wants to comply with the GPL. But, it would really be appreciated if there was a transition period for end users so that they are not forced to choose between leaving their sites vulnerable because they can't upgrade to v 1.0.13 or going to another CMS that they did not choose.

Thanks, Harry, for pointing that out for me. I have read it and commented in the forum, too.
Amy

AzzX you may wish to talk to Mambo about that.. we are here talking about Joomla.. and when people ask what license we use, we direct them to the GPL

Nope. The GPL is the GPL and that is the LICENSE.  Guidelines are just that- guidelines as are FAQs just FAQs  and both can be changed at the whim of whomever writes them, because they are NOT a LICENSE.  The GPL cannot be changed.

That is important to know. I can write all the guidelines and FAQs until the cows come home but the legally binding thing is the actual legal license.

Actually thats not in their license...it's in their Faq.
If we start bringing Faqs into it Mambo is in violation of every GPL contributed coder that ever contributed to it!
The Faq essentially changes the GPL license to LGPL.

Read the last paragraph in the actual Mambo license and see what it says...

Says can not be incorporated into any proprietary program....
Which means their Faq is in conflict with it's license.
If they wanted to allow such things they should have used the LGPL as their own license suggests they should do if they wish to permit such linkage.
They didn't do that most likely because they can't without getting permission from everyone who contributed code under the GPL.
And if they couldn't change the license itself to allow what they wanted to allow their Faq can't change it either!

Actually I have and love it so far. I was chatting with Louis last week, he and I share some Nawlins roots
I was telling him I really should try and get back involved so maybe I can do some testing. Not sure where I fit in since I am best described as a power user maybe.

I think Brad touched on my frustration with all of this. OK so some things have happened that made some people mad. It happens.
Was the process handled as well as it should have been? Well I looked at the team and best I can tell they are all of the species human being.
And well last time I checked we have not evolved to prefect being yet. So ok they made some mistakes. They also made a very popular CMS that even the critics have benefited from.
It is free software folks. What have you really got to gripe about? If you wrote code and are selling it against the original license didnt you sort of make a mistake too? Rider or no Rider the GPL is what it is, love it or hate it, it gave us Mambo and Joomla.
When all of this started I sort of saw both sides. As this drags on, I watched for the behavior at both camps. I have told the 3PD's I know personally, that I felt some of the behavior by some of the devs was creating a backlash against their cause.
I still think there is room for healthy debate, and yes GASP a real workable solution. When I look at who the people are trying to find that solution and the people bent on the fight, it is clear for me as a user. The not so perfect Joomla team, is still developing a great free product that we choose to use or not use. Aint freedom great.

What frustrates me are all the people taking the stance that Joomla is wrong, they are right. And then making global statements like "the community is crying out" The community will be fine if you would make up your mind and work with Joomla or move on to what ever it is you offer that is so supremely better.

You have your freedom to do so, we have a rite to express our opinion. Let it go, or join a productive conversation.
I have read some of the better threads on possible solutions, and there is promise. Not the gloom and doom a handful of people continue to try and promote.

Ok I have said enough. Let's do what we did when Mambo broke all the extensions. Learn the new Toy we have been given, support GPL developers where we can, and wait for the next killer add on that will come, in time.

And Mambo, well I was real close to trying it, and may still. But the old Mambo Joomla debate resurfacing makes me want to look elsewhere to broaden my CMS tool box.

End users do have minds, and they can read the forums out there. In the end we will choose the products that work best, regardless of the FUD that is spread.

Amen tjay
Like you, I wish all this circular arguments based on hype and mis-information would stop as well.. it's not productive to anyone.

I read nothing into it.  I was just commenting on what they said, not defending them one way or the other.  I am not privy to all dialog that goes on between the Joomla! team and others (nor should I be), so I can only comment on what I read here and on other public forums.  Did not mean to stir up any controversy...

Regarding this, I have a question. If a project had to enforce their license - the GPL - what would they do? Do they hire their own attorneys? Or does the FSF help?

The reason I ask is I have been wondering, if you choose the GPL, and if the FSF are the ones who would ultimately help enforce your license - then - how much help could you expect if you didn't follow the license to begin with?

I don't know if that makes sense, or not, or if the FSF even helps enforce it. I just have been wondering about that, if anyone knows.

Amy

Edit - Harry - you are right to raise it - we need to only talk facts. So, I appreciate it.

Understand Harry.. I am trying to inject some real facts into the speculation

Amy, I'm not sure that I follow your question exactly.

If you license your copyrighted work under gnu gpl and you feel your license has been violated, the FSF will look at what you have and do an investigation to find out if a violation has occurred. A lot of times it is just figuring this out  Then, they will work with the violator to help him or her come into compliance. When they are satisfied, it is over.

This is all explained in more detail on their website.

What you are saying is *exactly* what recently has been dawning on me. Admittedly, I know very little about the GPL. This has been a huge learning experience.

It seems that the value of a license comes down to an ability to achieve compliance. In the case of the GPL, the FSF will help with compliance, as you indicated. So, if you want their help, it only makes sense to use their license in the manner they intended. (Or, pick one better suited for the project needs.)

I am thinking the FSF would probably not be able (or willling?) to help seek compliance to modifications - at least not ones they didn't help develop. Making modifications would also make it difficult to know what part of the license could be enforced.

Depending on what and how much was "allowed" to deviate, over time, I think it could potentially render the license completely useless.

I will look at the website, thanks!...Amy

Edit: added "didn't", above, in bold.

Been reading the Smf take on this topic with great interest, is this quote correct:



Thread in question: http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=184557.msg1176353;boardseen#new

Reading both threads hurts the mind

I feel sorry for both parties that this situation has evolved in this way, both Joomla and Smf are great in thier respective fields, but alas, the existing bridge now is no more.  I accept this and look forward to a phpbb3 integration like http://cbconnector.com/

A phpbb3 bridge/connector for Joomla would be great. Bring it on!

I just downloaded phpbb3 wow it has gotten a lot better since I used it in 04

The point you and they are missing is not all of Joomla belongs to THEM (as in Their as in Joomla/OSM)
They can give you permission to use THIER code but they can't rightfully give you permission to use code that they got permission to use provided it is GPLed...

Neither can any other CMS that doesn't own 100% of the copyright or 100% of the code in that copyright!

AzzX

The key phrase there is "into other free programs" - unfortunately, SMF is not a free (as in liberty) program, so that provision does not fit.

BUT, an answer was provided by the FSF in that email SMF shared. Look for Brett Smith's response from July 23. Look how he indicates linking and importing create a derivative work. (Not good.) Then, he adds that PHP has exec functionality that *can* be used to connect GPL and non-GPL compliant environments.



I only feel sorry for the end users. I hope that SMF support Joomla! v 1.0.13 so that people can apply security upgrades. That will buy time for safe solutions.

Amy

Hello Brad,



I didn't want to double post, so that answer can be found here:
http://forum.joomla.org/index.php/topic ... #msg922365

Kind regards,