Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license change

[Radek Suski]

We have been in the business of promoting open source. On the JED we go as far as to say you can't distribute limited extensions from the same site. Are we missing out on something because we've excluded ourselves from proprietary projects?

This is exactly one of those reason why I'm against. We fought countless battles to convince people to GPL their extensions because we believe, because we care and we want to spread this philosophy.

Now suddenly we are saying; yeah, you know, in case of extensions it's not ok to use anything which is non-GPL. But if someone is going to use part of Joomla! then it's a fuuulllllyy different story. In this case we do not care any longer.

[nikosdion]

No to the LGPL from me.

[nonumber]

After reading all the ins and outs I retract my earlier 'NO' and replace it with a 'Hell NO!'.
I might retract that later with an 'I think I stopped caring, the moment I realised this public call for feedback was nothing more than a formality, as OSM has the right to do this and everybody that signed the JCA should shut up.'

[Radek Suski]

Yes to LGPL.
For me it's simple: framework stays opensource but it can be used by any application. Less restrictions = more people using it, more popularity and more contributors.

So we maybe start discussing about Joomla! goals and mission. Do we really value more that more people are using the platwork or it is the philosophy we care more about.

And high quality contributors.

This is wishful thinking. I could argue that same way that if we allow third party extension to be licences whatsoever then more people will write more extensions for Joomla! and we would possibly get more contributors.

This is about building a tool that is useful for both worlds.

But I don't give a damn about the other world to be honest

Our framework is the last at the party and having the most restrictive license won't help us to go up in the ranking.

What ranking? It's not about a rally

I want to see Joomla! in high PHP environments and in debates about best PHP tools.

But we are not a framework developers. We are project which is tied to a CMS. That CMS happens to have a good framework but I don't think we can compete wit Zend which is much bigger project and it is mainly a FW project.

[deleted user]

I see it first hand on a daily basis. Changing it just because it already happens is tantamount to making speeding legal.

That shouldn't be the only reason we change licenses, and in fact it never came up once when discussing internally. With that said, I'd rather be open about the fact that there are most likely folks out there not playing by the rules of the current license. Why deny the fact that a license change would work in their favor potentially?

Looking at the framework side of things I do think it would get worse in the long run. Sure, it opens it up to be used in more applications but I'm not sold on the idea that a license change to allow usage in a closed atmosphere would really help improve the framework.

On its own, no, a license change doesn't improve the Framework. What it does do is enable more parties to use the Framework (legally), which may interest them in contributing to the Framework, which goes to improve it for everyone. There are companies that cannot license code GPL for whatever reason, and developers who have a personal preference to not contribute to GPL licensed projects. We may get some new attention by folks who previously had written off Joomla for one reason or another, or folks just keep using the code to earn a living and not do anything to support the community that is helping them earn said living; they do have that right of choice, even if we don't like their decision.

License differences and details aside, it seems more of a change in course to me. We have been in the business of promoting open source. On the JED we go as far as to say you can't distribute limited extensions from the same site. Are we missing out on something because we've excluded ourselves from proprietary projects?

All of the licensing talks and JED decisions came well before my time in Joomla land; all I can do is accept the conditions I walked into and try to improve them for all. I don't think all the choices made in the past are the right choices, but I don't think we have to change (as a project) in such a way that makes it seem like we're reversing course on those past decisions.

Also, the CMS and Framework are two completely different marketplaces, with their only current common points being the contributors and the Joomla brand name. Though I respect the decisions that have been made over the years, I don't think we should let decisions that impacted Joomla as a project when its only "product" was the CMS affect how we handle new concepts like the Framework.

At the end of the day I feel we're trading off ideals for some vague possibilities.

In some ways, I can agree with that. At the same time, how much are we willing to lose if we continue to stay within the Joomla "bubble" and not try to expand as a project?

[deleted user]

This is about building a tool that is useful for both worlds.

But I don't give a damn about the other world to be honest

So if you don't care about the Framework, why do you care about its license?

[instance]

P.S.: PLT won't fork Joomla! Remember that we are here because we do our best to improve and spread Joomla! (and because we are supposed to be good on that). I've never been in a conversation where fork Joomla! was mentioned.

This is the crux of the misunderstanding. We're here to do our best to improve and spread open source software. It's Open Source Matters, not Joomla Matters. If someone wants to offer a counter-argument to my thesis that making Framework will result in less open code rather than more, I'd reconsider my position, but until then I'm not in favour of "Open Source Matters Unless Nobody is Using My Also-ran Framework in which Case More Adoption Rules Inc."

Why exactly are we interested in competing with other frameworks? If we were going to go LGPL, why the heck didn't we just contribute all the non-CMS specific stuff to one of the established frameworks?

I get that it's cool to work on a framework. That it would be even cooler to tell people that you're a major contributor to a library that gets used all over the place like Zend. I get that a lot of developers find writing nifty libraries that interface with revision control systems a lot more attractive than solving complex application level problems, especially in a community like ours.

But you guys need to grasp that for the vast majority of contributors, Framework is either part of the CMS, or merely a foundation for building Joomla applications like the CMS, specifically GPL licensed applications. That's why you're getting near universal push-back from everyone who isn't a Framework developer. The only way you can carry this issue is by ignoring or discounting the many other people who contribute to this thing. I'd really have no problem with you trying that. Take a copy, have OSM let you LGPL it, give a go. Just don't do it under the OSM/Joomla banner because it's not consistent with what most people in this project think we should be about.

[Radek Suski]

So if you don't care about the Framework, why do you care about its license?

The other world (I don't care about) is the closed software world

[worshipper]

So if you don't care about the Framework, why do you care about its license?

Because Joomla! and his framework is more than just code...

[JacquesR]

This is exactly one of those reason why I'm against. We fought countless battles to convince people to GPL their extensions because we believe, because we care and we want to spread this philosophy.

Joomla/OSM require people to license their extensions of Joomla! under the GPL because the Joomla! CMS (that they are extending the code of) is licensed GPL, and that's the Project's understanding (based on legal advice) on what they are obliged to do.

Some may do it for philosophical reasons too.

This situation would not change if the Framework was LGPL-licensed, because it would be GPL when used within the CMS. (that's my understanding of it anyway)

--
Jacques
(Joomla! user and volunteer)

[Radek Suski]

Joomla/OSM require people to license their extensions of Joomla! under the GPL because the Joomla! CMS

Exactly. And why Joomla! CMS is licensed under GPL?

[carmyman]

I agree with Brian that this is not a good option for Joomla.

- LPGL

[dilbert4life]

This is exactly one of those reason why I'm against. We fought countless battles to convince people to GPL their extensions because we believe, because we care and we want to spread this philosophy.

Now suddenly we are saying; yeah, you know, in case of extensions it's not ok to use anything which is non-GPL. But if someone is going to use part of Joomla! then it's a fuuulllllyy different story. In this case we do not care any longer.

Extensions on the JED must be GPL because the extend the core GPL classes, not because of some high ideal held by the project. You can still list an extension on the JED that has a dependency on non-GPL libraries.

For example, if I write an extension that allows for remote filesystem navigation, the parts of my code that interface with the core Joomla GPL libraries must be GPL. However, I can still use Flysystem (an MIT licensed library for accessing remote filesystems) as a dependency of my extension, and include with my extension listed on the JED.

[Radek Suski]

not because of some high ideal held by the project.

And this is where I completely disagree.

And by the way, I don't mean using other licensed Open Source software, I simply don't want to that Joomla! Framework can be used in non-Open Source software

[dilbert4life]

It's Open Source Matters, not Joomla Matters

This is your core misunderstanding. It is Open Source Matters, not Free Software Matters. LGPL is a legitimate Open Source License, and in reality it is the only one that guarantees all four freedoms of free software. The GPL violates Freedom 0 - The freedom to run the program, for any purpose. The GPL forbids running the program in proprietary software, thus violating Freedom 0.

If you really care about Open Source and the 4 Freedoms, you'd support LGPL. Or you can stick to your religious debate of "Free Software Matters".

[dilbert4life]

And this is where I completely disagree.

It's ok for you to disagree. Doesn't make you right, but you can still disagree. The fact is software linked with and built from GPL software must be GPL. And that's all that matters and why the restriction was put in place. If you distribute a Joomla Extension under any other license than GPL, then you are already breaking the rules and no, we should not be listing your software on the JED.

[JacquesR]

Joomla/OSM require people to license their extensions of Joomla! under the GPL because the Joomla! CMS

Exactly. And why Joomla! CMS is licensed under GPL?

Because the Joomla! CMS is a fork from the GPL-licensed Mambo code, and because the core developers of that time thought that the GPL open source license is the best for the CMS.

The PLT (as far as I'm aware) still think that the GPL is best for the CMS.

The Production Leadership Team (that includes a fair number of respected and active code contributors) however (as reported) agrees with the Framework team, that the open source LGPL is a better suited license for the Framework code.

--
Jacques
(Joomla! user and volunteer)

[nonumber]

Extensions on the JED must be GPL because the extend the core GPL classes, not because of some high ideal held by the project.

That is not true. Complete opposite AFAIK. There is no legal issue with extensions being non-GPL. They are just not welcome on the JED exactly for that reason: philosophy (or high ideal).

[lavsteph]

NO to LGPL

[dilbert4life]

The PLT (as far as I'm aware) still think that the GPL is best for the CMS.

The Production Leadership Team (that includes a fair number of respected and active code contributors) however (as reported) agrees with the Framework team, that the open source LGPL is a better suited license for the Framework code.

That is correct. The PLT believes the GPL is and will forever remain the best Open Source license for the CMS.

Speaking under my own opinion again, the GPL is best for end user products to guarantee certain freedoms for those users. The LGPL is best for libraries used to build end user products.

There is no legal issue with extensions being non-GPL.

Actually there is. When you distribute software built on top of GPL software, you are legally obligated to distribute that software as GPL. If you don't then you have legal issues. That's the whole goal and purpose of the GPL's existence, to make it legally binding upon users to distribute modifications and derivatives as GPL.

[nonumber]

It's ok for you to disagree. Doesn't make you right, but you can still disagree. The fact is software linked with and built from GPL software must be GPL. And that's all that matters and why the restriction was put in place. If you distribute a Joomla Extension under any other license than GPL, then you are already breaking the rules and no, we should not be listing your software on the JED.

False info there.
Extensions do not break GPL rules by being non-GPL. That would AFAIK only be the case if the are distributed with the Joomla package.

[nonumber]

After reading all the ins and outs I retract my earlier 'NO' and replace it with a 'Hell NO!'.
I might retract that later with an 'I think I stopped caring, the moment I realised this public call for feedback was nothing more than a formality, as OSM has the right to do this and everybody that signed the JCA should shut up.'

Yep, I was right:
I retract my earlier 'Hell NO!' to LGPL and replace it with:
'I think I stopped caring, the moment I realised this public call for feedback was nothing more than a formality, as OSM has the right to do this and everybody that signed the JCA should shut up.'

Over and out.

[dilbert4life]

False info there.
Extensions do not break GPL rules by being non-GPL. That would AFAIK only be the case if the are distributed with the Joomla package.

That is not true. Software that extends GPL software (as all Joomla Extensions do) MUST be GPL. You are incorrect in your understanding.

[nonumber]

Ok

[rdeutz]

The heated discussion reminds me of a discussion we had at the very beginning of the Joomla-Project about license related things. This discussion had only losers, I hope this discussion here will have a better end. Essentially I can’t say in detail why I think I have to start with saying that: all here comes with the best in mind!

I am also developing extensions and also sometimes platform apps, so I am using the whole product catalog we have. Till now I don’t had a client complaining that Joomla! is GPL, but that’s me. I also truly believe that Joomla! is so successful because of a community where a lot of people do work. Some people are not so visible some more, we as developers can count commits, or fixed bugs or many more things. Other people are working on mailing list endless hours to figure out Trademark problems or in forum or organising Joomladays. For me there is not someone who has to say more or less within the contributing and Joomla! using community.

This discussion has a serious problem, we all are guessing. There isn’t a role model for the proposed change. We also don’t know what are the side effects, maybe some people working in other areas leave the project because we are not 100% GPL, who knows. Did I say we are guessing? Oh yes I did.

So we don’t know, that’s great to make decisions. I am not a 100% believer in some philosophical position. Sometimes it is good to ask questions:

What are the benefits, what can we win?

We could attract other developers. …. I don’t think that will work. Using the platform is good when you are already developing for Joomla! because you know how it works and can extend easily. There are more „sexy“ frameworks on the market.
We attract another market: closed source software. That would mean we have something that a closed source software developer can use to make the product better. Will the project has a benefit, I don’t thinks so.

What can we lose?
Maybe people that are not supporting a not 100% GPL project. I don’t see a big risk here (still guessing).
Plausibility, because of the position we have for the JED and other areas. That is a serious one, it is already hard to explain people what is allowed and what not.

I could continue here for a while, but it will still be guessing. It ends for me with the question what do >>>> I <<<<< think is the best for the project. I have changed my mind I though a year ago LGPL is good for the framework/project today I think it is better not to change and stay to the GPL. There is not so much to win and we should concentrate on our community and make this community stronger. If the framework is so good (and I think it is) it will win on the long run.

So if I have to chose, it is a no.

[Radek Suski]

I have changed my mind I though a year ago LGPL is good for the framework/project today I think it is better not to change and stay to the GPL.

I'm actually exactly in the same position. I thought previously it may be good. Now I have been convinced that it isn't.

There is not so much to win and we should concentrate on our community and make this community stronger. If the framework is so good (and I think it is) it will win on the long run.

Exactly!

Thanks Robert

[dilbert4life]

The anti-LGPL arguments can be summed up in one phrase: it would hurt the Free Software Movement.

However, we're not here for "Free Software" we're here to discuss what would be best for Joomla. Licensing the Framework as LGPL does 2 important things. It extends the reach of the Joomla Project and opens the door to potential new contributors. The change has no negative impact on the project itself whatsoever.

[Radek Suski]

The anti-LGPL arguments can be summed up in one phrase: it would hurt the Free Software Movement.

The most important - yes.

we're here to discuss what would be best for Joomla.

It's depend very much of the definition of "best" and the definition of Joomla!

It extends the reach of the Joomla Project and opens the door to potential new contributors.

No. It doesn't and I doubt very much that it will engage new contributors.
It's your theory and you cannot prove it.

The change has no negative impact on the project itself whatsoever.

Yes it has

[dilbert4life]

It extends the reach of the Joomla Project and opens the door to potential new contributors.

No. It doesn't and I doubt very much that it will engage new contributors.
It's your theory and you cannot prove it.

Just saying "no" isn't a way to make a point. LGPL does in fact extend the reach of the project, whether you acknowledge it or not. It also opens the door to potential new contributors.

The change has no negative impact on the project itself whatsoever.

Yes it has

Rather than saying "yes it has", why don't you enumerate these supposed negative impacts you believe will occur?

[digitline]

In a real world scenario, a modern Joomla web site is organized in a following manner
- Joomla framework
- Eventual Framework-on-Framework or Nooku
- CMS
- CCK
- Template
- jQuery

Just a pseudo question: If we need all this layers to achieve interaction with visitor, why would anybody consider advantageous to use just Joomla Framework, which is just a drop in the sea, compared to all the infrastructure that surrounds it. So instead of lobbying for LGPL, it would be more productive to push toward, for example, some core CCK support. Instead of whining that other platforms are ahead of Joomla! (reluctantly looking at Drupal), we can join the good examples of other Open Source CMSes.

As for the taking (or not) pride of participating in projects such as Joomla (framework or CMS, without distinction), I do not see why should any developer feel Joomla! is an underdog. In the eyes of clients Wordpress, Joomla, Drupal, Typo3, just to mention the few, are all just some strange names, Open Source is just interpreted as free software (costing almost nothing). Since I named them before, I want to mention the collaboration and joint Open Source CMSes effort taking place in Europe on couple of fairs during last year. Instead of confrontation, they embraced the strength of uniqueness of every single platform. So, instead of ranting about the (in)visibility of our platform, we should all join forces to make it even stronger and "polish" the shine of the Joomla! or even make it more distinct.