Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license change

This board is for discussions about joomla.org blog posts.
Locked
User avatar
Jenny
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 6237
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Jenny » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:01 am

AmyStephen wrote:I was initially confused/concerned at some of these comments, too. But, I understand the point to be if phpMailer, for example, came and wanted to contribute their work for the Joomla Framework to maintain, knowing it's under the LGPL, that new contribution could be received under that license. If that's the point, then, yes, that's always been how I understood.

In the case where the project has been releasing code under one license, changing to another requires OSM's consent. That makes sense, too, and it's why OSM is involved (they get to decide) and have requested input.

To add, bringing the point up like was done created unnecessary concern. There was probably no reason to mention it. It has nothing to do with the relicensing and it had a sense of feeling (for lack of a better word) threatening. (Tho, I'm not saying that was the intention.) Timing was off, IMO.
Highly unlikely scenario as in 0% probability that phpMailer would be given over to the Framework to maintain. Can you at least provide an example that has some relevance?
Co-author of the Official Joomla! Book http://officialjoomlabook.com
Marpo Multimedia http://marpomultimedia.com

 
AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by AmyStephen » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:10 am

In all honesty, Jenny, If I contributed framework packages that I have written, I would request the LGPL. I believe it's a showstopper to use the GPL on framework code. Very few devs will use it.

User avatar
Jenny
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 6237
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Jenny » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:18 am

I understand the dev side of it Amy, I really do.

I don't think it is unreasonable to request that it is not called Joomla! Joomla is GPL and will always be GPL. Period. Call it something else so there isn't brand dilution. What is the major problem with calling the Framework something else than Joomla?

As the trademark/name/brand is the ONLY part of any of this that OSM has any say in considering all of the information given, OSM needs to think very carefully about this decision.

Joomla! is a billion dollar industry worldwide that is based on it being GPL, which has been touted since its inception - it being GPL was the argument given for people to create and make either their business a Joomla! based business, or to create their business web presence using Joomla, with the GPL being one of the main points of why it should be adopted.

Edit: billion is maybe a bit of an exaggeration. Multi-multi-multi- million dollar industry.
Last edited by Jenny on Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Co-author of the Official Joomla! Book http://officialjoomlabook.com
Marpo Multimedia http://marpomultimedia.com

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:19 am

Jenny wrote:I am not mistaken, I believe. You have repeatedly stated that as a committer you will commit new code as only as LGPL and replace or rewrite existing code and commit it as LGPL - that makes this whole conversation moot in regards to the license, as you have made it clear exactly what you intend to do.
That's not what I said at all (well, ok, it might be the words I used but let me explain the nuance).

If you, for example, submit a package and make it clear that it's GPL, I as a committer can't relicense it because it's not my code. However, *I* can, for example, submit my new code "now" to either the CMS or the Framework, let's say a MongoDB-to-SQL query parser or maybe a poor-man's ORM, under the LGPL and it would be accepted. I have certainly made is abundantly clear that it is possible to "workaround" relicensing by submitting replacement packages, but while not impossible, it is not a trivial exercise. I would also contend it's probably not the wisest course of action to replace the existing code - but I have absolutely no ethical, moral, legal or "founding principles" dilemma with people adding new code under the LGPL in accordance with the JCA (you are correct, that part of the conversation is indeed moot, but that's not the question we asked OSM to consider - why would we ask them for permission to do something we are allowed to do?). OSM could move to strike the LGPL from the JCA but the historical precedent is that requires a full vote of OSM, PLT and CLT. The AGPL was removed unanimously, as I recall, on advice from the PLT. I can only speculate but I can't see the PLT agreeing to or initiating a move to remove the LGPL from the JCA.
Jenny wrote:The only remaining issue is: if it will be allowed to use the name/brand of Joomla! while doing what you have clearly stated you are going to do.
We can cross that bridge if we come to it.
Jenny wrote:The use of the trademark/name/brand is the only thing that OSM actually does have control over in regards to the Framework.
No, that's not explicitly correct either. In addition to the trademark, OSM is the copyright holder of the source code and that affords them certain legal rights, one of which is to say what the license is. I hope that clears up your misunderstanding.
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:21 am

Jenny wrote:Highly unlikely scenario as in 0% probability that phpMailer would be given over to the Framework to maintain. Can you at least provide an example that has some relevance?
Highly unlikely indeed, but relevant because it's a good example of code we'd drop in favour of better alternatives. My advice there is to obtain SwiftMailer through Composer. Similarly, we aren't maintaining the Log package anymore because Monolog blows us out of the water (PSR-3 also helps greatly).
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
Jenny
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 6237
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Jenny » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:23 am

Andrew you have stated that you will rewrite or replace the GPL code. You have stated you will only accept LGPL code.
Co-author of the Official Joomla! Book http://officialjoomlabook.com
Marpo Multimedia http://marpomultimedia.com

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:29 am

Jenny wrote:Edit: billion is maybe a bit of an exaggeration. Multi-multi-multi- million dollar industry.
Doesn't three multi's get you back to a billion again? ;) I would think the MIT market is several orders of magnitude larger again.
Jenny wrote:Andrew you have stated that you will rewrite or replace the GPL code. You have stated you will only accept LGPL code.
I said that we "could" replace the GPL code. If I did state explicitly or implicitly that I, a committer, will only accept LGPL code then I retract the statement to remove any confusion it may have cause. I don't have the authority to make that call as an individual. It is, however, a bit grey because you are submitting the code under the JCA, so you are leaving it up to the PLT to decide which license it will apply.
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
Jenny
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 6237
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 2:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Jenny » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:36 am

The contract is with OSM not the PLT. The contract by your logic would then allow OSM to decide under which license the code is committed NOT the PLT.
Co-author of the Official Joomla! Book http://officialjoomlabook.com
Marpo Multimedia http://marpomultimedia.com

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:43 am

masterchief wrote: It is, however, a bit grey because you are submitting the code under the JCA, so you are leaving it up to the PLT to decide which license it will apply.
Actually, the JCA is a contract between the contributor and OSM - PLT can only decide what to accept but has zero authority decide which license it will apply.

http://developer.joomla.org/9-site/7-jo ... duals.html

In fact, if push comes to shove, there are no contractual rights granted under the JCA by OSM to PLT to make any decisions of what contributions are made, under what circumstances those contributions are made, to make any determination as to what licenses are accepted or imposed, or even for PLT to act on behalf of Joomla! or OSM altogether.

I'm not suggesting this, but the reality is that

1) OSM could replace the PLT (i.e. just fork it and put another team on it);

2) The PLT cannot, without the consent of OSM, use the Joomla! Trademark.

N

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:45 am

Jenny wrote:The contract is with OSM not the PLT. The contract by your logic would then allow OSM to decide under which license the code is committed NOT the PLT.
That is correct (I'm glad we finally got there), but you are entering into an area that is above my pay grade (that's a metaphor by the way). If you have a problem with the existing governance mechanics of OSM and the PLT, I suggest you contact the Board and the PLT to voice your concerns directly.

@Niv, same advice and I thought we had an understanding about bringing up governance issues? Start a new thread please!
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by AmyStephen » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:49 am

Jenny -

I just want to leave you with one thought in case the license change is approved and the Joomla Framework is allowed to keep its name (which is something I really believe is important to happen): "Don't be discouraged."

In my opinion, if that happens, it's highly likely it would *enhance* the Joomla TM. Nearly every open source project is attempting to decouple their code for flexibility knowing the day of the "monolithic application" is drawing to a close.

I respect do you do not agree and I accept I could be wrong. But, if it does turn out that way, just keep in mind, it could be a great thing. I don't want you to feel like "the end is near", or something like that. You have a lot of yourself invested in Joomla and I hope you just stay encouraged.

Thanks for your considerable contributions to Joomla. You are an important part of the foundation of this community.

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 38452
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Webdongle » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:54 am

Jenny wrote:Andrew you have stated that you will rewrite or replace the GPL code. You have stated you will only accept LGPL code.
That imho is out of context of what Andrew said.
  • He says that because of the terms of the JCA(and GPL compatibility) the devs can use code that have a licence that is listed as 'Approved'.
  • He says that The OSM decide the licence type of Joomla(framework and CMS).
  • He has described that the PLT control what code is added to Joomla and that is in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the OSM and permission given by the originators (signing the JCA) of that 'added' code.
  • He has explained that the 'added' code absorbed into Joomla it is then under the licence that the OSM has decided the Joomla(framework and CMS) will use.
This afaik shows that The OSM decides which licence Joomla(framework and CMS) uses. The PLT decide what code is correct according to the guidelines it has to follow. It also (again afaik) shows why signing the JCA applies to the licence of the Contributed code and not the licence Joomla(framework and CMS) uses.

The references to rewriting the code (from what I see) were giving as examples of what might happen under different scenarios.
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 12:55 am

mastercheese wrote:@Niv, I thought we had an understanding about bringing up governance issues? Start a new thread please!
^
|| in case you haven't noticed these are the responses to 'straighten out' the information assertions made by you (matters which you state are apparently above your pay grade but which you are continuously opining on) with respect to 'licensing' and 'authority' - we just want folks to have the straight goods - some people might actually confuse what you are saying for fact - which would, as I and others have stated - render this entire thread as 'moot' when it is not.

God forbid somebody should make a decision based on the understanding of the facts that you've been providing.

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:01 am

@Niv, God forbid you may find I even agree with your points on the OSM-PLT-CLT relationship (you've hit a very big nail on the head), but this is not the thread to air those concerns. Start a new one. Thanks for your continued understanding on the matter.
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 38452
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Webdongle » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:18 am

NivF007 wrote:...
In fact, if push comes to shove, there are no contractual rights granted under the JCA by OSM to PLT to make any decisions of what contributions are made, under what circumstances those contributions are made, to make any determination as to what licenses are accepted or imposed, or even for PLT to act on behalf of Joomla! or OSM altogether....
Someone has to decide if the Contributed code is
A. In accordance with the Licence that the OSM choose.
B. In accordance with the terms of the JCA
C. Suitable to use (fit for purpose).
That as Andrew explained is the PLT.

It appears to me that the OSM decide on which licence to use for Joomla(framework and CMS) and that the PLT are delegated by the OSM to carry out A, B and C (above).

@Andrew
Would you agree that is an accurate summary ?
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:25 am

Webdongle wrote:Someone has to decide if the Contributed code is
A. In accordance with the Licence that the OSM choose.
B. In accordance with the terms of the JCA
C. Suitable to use (fit for purpose).
That as Andrew explained is the PLT.

It appears to me that the OSM decide on which licence to use for Joomla(framework and CMS) and that the PLT are delegated by the OSM to carry out A, B and C (above).

@Andrew
Would you agree that is an accurate summary ?
Yes, that is an accurate summary of how it works today (we call it delegated authority - spot on!), but to Niv's and Jen's points (and they are absolutely right), it only operates on gentleman's agreements at best, or the threat of mutual annihilation at worst. We should have a discussion about formalising the role of the PLT and the CLT in the context of OSM, and I have very strong opinions about that, but this is not the thread to deal with those issues because licensing is but one of many issues that such a discussion needs to resolve (probably the least important of all).
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:39 am

mastercheese wrote:but to Niv's and Jen's points (and they are absolutely right), it only operates on gentleman's agreements at best, or the threat of mutual annihilation at worst
What an incredibly sad statement and load of (damn...where is the BS emoticon when you need it?!!!)

Are we having a discussion on GPL v. LGPL on the merits of what's best for Joomla!? or

Are we having a discussion on what Andrew Eddie and co are threatening to do if OSM does not do as you wish?

Careful here, because what you term 'mutual annihilation' others may see as 'liberation' from such nonsense.

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 1:44 am

@Niv, had to laugh, but it's a term that we've used before in our community and amongst the leadership, not to mention the Open Source world in general. I apologise if the colloquialism caused you offence. I meant it with "love" :) If you need me to explain what it means, I'll be happy to take an explanation offline.
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:24 am

Andrew,

I don't need a personal explanation on mutual assured destruction or any other tactics of attrition.

I believe this has been an 'understanding' or 'phrase' used by you for several years now - and you seem to believe it has semblance of truth in describing the current circumstance or the relationship you now find yourself in with OSM (a position you seem to continuously run to when you can't win a debate on its merits to get your way).

Here is your 'courtesy wake up call:'

You have just made the best argument in the world for OSM to stick to GPL.

Sticking with GPL ensures the best defence for the Joomla! Community as a whole in the event you and company actually part ways.

It means that if you use the existing Joomla! code-base, and you leave and decide to compete with Joomla!, any derivative code you and company produce and distribute comes back to Joomla! As you have corrected my definition of GPL, I will use your term - ALL your code.

Under GPL, any loss by the Joomla! Community is quickly recovered!

If OSM where to switch to LGPL this would not be the case and your request, if adhered to, to switch to LGPL will have been to our demise

---

Failure to argue the license switch on the merits

You are forcing us to have 2 debates:

The first is can we, as a project, withstand an exodus of disgruntled developers if we don't do exactly as they say?

The second is on the merits of an GPL vs. LGPL for the good of the project.

In the first case, you will likely, and perhaps to your surprise, find that the answer is not that difficult for us - nobody relishes the idea of perpetually being cornered to make decisions they don't feel right about - and that will win out, always, in the end. You will ultimately lose with this tactic - guaranteed.

In the second case, you and others, arguing on its merits, have done amazing job (and actually won my support), and are gaining some momentum.

For example, I have found myself now in support of a switch to LGPL (although my closest peers in the JUGT would likely want to see my head on a platter for it).

---

Here is what I am going to suggest. Drop this nonsensical concept of mutual annihilation both from your vocabulary and in how you do the calculus for your decisions with respect to the project - if it served you well in the past - it certainly does not do so now.

It is deeply flawed - while the project will likely recover rather quickly, you will mostly likely not. Given your tremendous contributions - such a position would be a very bitter pill to swallow - not just for the project, but for you as well - but it will arise because you have ultimately left no alternative.

It benefits nobody. It's tiring and it's old.

Let's stick to the merits - I'm in your corner on this and very much want to do what I can help you and the rest of the devs out, not just on the licensing - but on the end goal - doing what we can to invigorate development (the conversation I feel we really should be having).

I want to do so, because I have a tremendous amount of respect for the talent, goodwill and decency of the lot - not because I, or anybody else, feels in the slightest threatened by anything you may or may not do.

---

Let's replace the concept and verbiage of mutual annihilation with one of mutual respect and a symbiotic relationship.

You'll find we'll get a lot farther, a lot faster with a lot less drama - and we'll all feel much better about what accomplish together.

---

N

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by AmyStephen » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:29 am

NivF007 wrote: Here is your 'courtesy wake up call:'
That is enough of the walls of freakin text. You want to argue with someone day after day after day - join a debate club. You want to insult someone for the way they talk to others - look in the mirror.

The one comment you made that I agree with "It is tiresome."

Might I politely ask that you please shut up.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:37 am

AmyStephen wrote:
NivF007 wrote: Here is your 'courtesy wake up call:'
That is enough of the walls of freakin text. You want to argue with someone day after day after day - join a debate club. You want to insult someone for the way they talk to others - look in the mirror.

The one comment you made that I agree with "It is tiresome."

Might I politely ask that you please shut up.
You can ask whatever you want - and thanks for being polite.

Quite simply, I don't want to live under 'threat of mutual annihilation' from any group of people when it comes to the Joomla! project - especially when it comes to licensing decisions.

It's nonsense.

AmyStephen
Joomla! Champion
Joomla! Champion
Posts: 7056
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Nebraska
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by AmyStephen » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:43 am

Then use Drupal. And watch this video - http://www.[youtube].com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE

You are doing exactly the same thing to Andrew that you did to Paul. Problem with authority figures? Work it out -- outside of the Joomla Forums, please.

You have MORE than said your piece and you can't seem to figure out how to do so without personally attacking key contributors so Stop. Posting.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 2:55 am

AmyStephen wrote:Then use Drupal. And watch this video - http://www.[youtube].com/watch?v=ZSFDm3UYkeE

You are doing exactly the same thing to Andrew that you did to Paul. Problem with authority figures? Work it out -- outside of the Joomla Forums, please.

You have MORE than said your piece and you can't seem to figure out how to do so without personally attacking key contributors so Stop. Posting.
You know Amy, here is the problem - you are muddling the conversation.

If Andrew Eddie is a big enough boy to threaten the Joomla! Community with 'mutual annihilation' then he is certainly a big enough boy to accept the response and to made to understand that some of us don't tolerate that when it comes the decisions we are being asked to make.

If you have a problem with that - too bad.

N

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:01 am

@Niv, I'm confident most people know what I meant and they know what you are trying to do. Please leave the straw-man arguments at home - we've all seen what you have been doing in the OSM forums. We don't want a repeat of that on the production side of the project.
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:09 am

masterchief wrote:@Niv, I'm confident most people know what I meant


i.e. any number of combinations of things you have been claiming you will do except abide by the decision you are asking OSM to make and we are going to be asked to abide by
masterchief wrote:and they know what you are trying to do.
i.e. make it clear that those tactics don't fly and that none of us have to tolerate those tactics to feel cornered into making a decision.

If you want to agree to leave at that great. If not...let me go get a coffee because this is going to be good.

N

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 38452
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Webdongle » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:28 am

masterchief wrote:...we call it delegated authority - spot on!....
We call it ... 'you don't go to the barbers and tell them how to hold the scissors' or 'you don't get a dog and wag your own tail'.
masterchief wrote: it only operates on gentleman's agreements at best, or the threat of mutual annihilation at worst. We should have a discussion about formalising the role of the PLT and the CLT in the context of OSM, and I have very strong opinions about that, but this is not the thread to deal with those issues
That may be part of the reason between the devs and us non-devs.

Why LGPL is an issue
The issue of a LGPL licence is a big deal for many. I can only speak for myself (although others have expressed similar opinions). I Give my time freely so that the final product can be used by anyone. If people make money out of the finished product all well and good. If people make money out of their supplying/creating websites/maintaining websites etc with the finished product all well and good. But if someone is able to provide a proprietary product from the framework then I will feel well shafted. Because I have given my time and effort testing that the framework works with the cms (if Joomla cms uses the framework then testers are also testing the framework) thinking anyone can benefit from my effort.

If the framework is licensed LGPL(for whatever reason) and thus people can use it to create propitiatory products then I will need to think very seriously about how much support I put into Joomla. This is by no means a threat ... and I realise I am just one person ... it is by way of explaining how I feel and why. There are others that feel the same way.

Why GPL ?
I make a distinction between people making money out of using the finished product and people making money out of using the finished product in a way that excludes others from doing the same. It is my understanding that the GPL prevents the latter. If the framework is LGPLed then CMS will still be GPL and still prevent people making money out of using the finished product in a way that excludes others from doing the same. However ... people will then be able to create proprietary products with the framework.

The distinction devs make between the framework and the cms is relatively clear to me(it has been for sometime). Nevertheless ... because the framework and cms are (for want of a better word) conjoined to create the Joomla full package then ... the cms is 'guilty by association' if the framework is LGPL. At least that is how many non devs see it. Using LGPL code in a GPL licence is (from a non dev point of view) different to becoming an LGPL licence.
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

User avatar
NivF007
Joomla! Explorer
Joomla! Explorer
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:51 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by NivF007 » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:40 am

@webdongle - this is very well put to describe what was the basis for my strong support for GPL and hesitation with LGPL - better in my view than anybody has put it to date.

But in contrast, what are your thoughts about jQuery, for example, that uses MIT, or Bootstrap, that also now uses MIT?

Surely, with the 2 of the most popular open-source projects we all gain and benefit tremendously.

Who have been the biggest winners in the end if not for anybody who wants to freely use great software?

User avatar
masterchief
Joomla! Hero
Joomla! Hero
Posts: 2316
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:45 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Contact:

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by masterchief » Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:41 am

Webdongle wrote:But if someone is able to provide a proprietary product from the framework then I will feel well shafted. Because I have given my time and effort testing that the framework works with the cms (if Joomla cms uses the framework then testers are also testing the framework) thinking anyone can benefit from my effort.
That is actually possible now because we turn a blind-eye to template clubs and allow them to establish proprietary site licensing for their artistic works. I hear you because in hindsight, I think we made the wrong call. On the other hand, it also generates jobs for people and I think we can foster an environment of mutual cooperation and respect with proprietary vendors. Unfortunately there is no right or wrong answer. The reality is this license debate is difficult because the project itself is inconsistent in how it works with licenses.
The distinction devs make between the framework and the cms is relatively clear to me(it has been for sometime). Nevertheless ... because the framework and cms are (for want of a better word) conjoined to create the Joomla full package then ... the cms is 'guilty by association' if the framework is LGPL. At least that is how many non devs see it. Using LGPL code in a GPL licence is (from a non dev point of view) different to becoming an LGPL licence.
In all honesty I think the assessment is right, but that doesn't mean we can't change the public perception. We definitely need to make a regular point of explaining our licenses and why we gather around the most of the "family" of GPL licenses (excluding AGPL, for good reason). I personally don't have a problem with using MIT, but to your point, are we guilty by association as a project by using it. I don't know ...
Andrew Eddie - Tweet @AndrewEddie
<><
http://eddify.me
http://www.kiva.org/team/joomla - Got Joomla for free? Pay it forward and help fight poverty.

User avatar
Webdongle
Joomla! Master
Joomla! Master
Posts: 38452
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:58 pm

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by Webdongle » Wed Mar 05, 2014 4:35 am

masterchief wrote:
Webdongle wrote:But if someone is able to provide a proprietary product from the framework then I will feel well shafted. Because I have given my time and effort testing that the framework works with the cms (if Joomla cms uses the framework then testers are also testing the framework) thinking anyone can benefit from my effort.
That is actually possible now because we turn a blind-eye to template clubs and allow them to establish proprietary site licensing for their artistic works I hear you because in hindsight, I think we made the wrong call. ...
...
There will always be a grey area and the fact that they are adding artistic work is not coding doesn't sound 3 bad to me. But you saying "in hindsight, I think we made the wrong call" ... sounds like you are in favour of GPL




masterchief wrote:... but to your point, are we guilty by association as a project by using it. I don't know ...
That is matter of personal opinion rather than fact and everyone will have their own opinion on that. My opinion is based on "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (yes I know LGPL isn't evil in the sense of the phrase).

If the framework is LGPLed I will probably still use Joomla but will put less back. The only thing that would stop me using Joomla is if the current release cycle does not change. That is the biggest problem with using Joomla for many.

The licence issue is more about what people will give back. And if the reason for a LGPed framework is to attract devs that won't touch GPL then do we really want that mindset ? There is a big enough rift between Devs and non devs as it is without attracting devs that have an anti GPL mind set. That is reason enough to stay well clear of Joomla framework (or cms) being LGPLed.
http://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/
https://www.weblinksonline.co.uk/updating-joomla.html
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results": Albert Einstein

jodofin
Joomla! Enthusiast
Joomla! Enthusiast
Posts: 113
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:06 am

Re: Feedback on potential Joomla! Framework LGPL license cha

Post by jodofin » Wed Mar 05, 2014 4:51 am

NivF007 wrote:Andrew,

Sticking with GPL ensures the best defence for the Joomla! Community as a whole in the event you and company actually part ways...
I actually don't see any threats being made.

Developers are free to decide how they work with Joomla.

It may even be possible to have both GPL and LGPL contributions into a single project. I don't know.

There may need to be a parting of the ways, but Joomla means 'together'. Thats the ethos.

The crux is during THIS discussion its pretty important to know where different people stand. That's crucial. Without knowing how folk will react to the decision on relicensing its difficult to argue / persuade / encourage / discourage / agree / disagree.

State your position, allow others to state theirs. Agree / disagree / persuade / dissuade.

A wise man once said.
let's stop taking ourselves so seriously.

 

Locked

Return to “Community Blog Discussions”