Welcome to the Compass Designs website, powered by Joomla 1.5! The goal of this new site is to be the place to bookmark if you are looking for quality Joomla templates, tutorials, news and tips.Whose Joomla is it anyway?
Tagged in Untagged
The core team of Joomla has finally (after 2 months of high tension discussion) issued a statement about a change in the license of Joomla.
I have been keeping my posts relatively neutral, encouraging people to express an opinion, but I have had several people ask me for my take on all this, and what I think the consequences will be. So here goes
The core team of Joomla has finally (after 2 months of high tension discussion) issued a statement about a change in the license of Joomla.
I have been keeping my blog posts here relatively neutral, encouraging people to express an opinion, but I have had several people ask me for my take on all this, and what I think the consequences will be. So here goes
So what we talking about?
At issue are third party Joomla extensions and some modern templates. There are many of them that are sold on a per domain license. You probably have bought and used one on your Joomla website.
Since its creation in 2005, Joomla has always encouraged these 3rd party developers. There was a spot on the extensions site for them, there were initially FAQ's that they say non-GPL extensions were ok, www.joomla.org even used proprietary extensions on its own sites.
License, GPL, proprietary, wha?
OK, the license most commonly linked to open source software like Joomla is the GPL. I am not going to describe what it means because of my next point; you stand a 50% chance of disagreeing with me :)
It's really interesting because people's world views and philosophies drive their interpretation of it. The fact of the matter it's been hardly ever tested in court, so while everyone tends to say "that's legal, that's not", they are just relying on the opinion of their lawyers, and a lawyer will always have the opinion you want him to, that's why you are paying him
Catching a cold, the viral nature of the GPL.
Broadly speaking, if you create a derivative bit of code from something that is GPL, then it too becomes GPL when you distribute it. You can't have proprietary code.
Simple enough?
No, not really, this is where people's interpretations come in. You could image a bell curve of people's opinion about this. At one end you have the Freedom Software Foundation who (imho) believes that if you breathe on another bit of code, it becomes GPL. At the other end you have, I don't know, Microsoft, who probably thinks that a derivative would have to be very very tightly tied into the GPL code to have caught the license.
Interesting Linus Torvalds has always disagreed with the FSF's interpretation of the license. We'll come back to that in a moment. In 2005 and 2006 Joomla, as mentioned above had a more "Linus-like" view of the viral nature of the GPL.
The implications of catching a GPL cold
In the context of Joomla, this comes down to business models.
To a man (and a few women) Joomla 3rd party commercial developers have the simple business of you pay a domain license for the extension. You can't do that with GPL extensions because the GPL gives the right to redistribute. They all have this model for a couple of reasons:
- because the Joomla project said it was OK in 2005 and 2006.
- because it's the easiest to set up, and most profitable for the one-man shops that characterize Joomla.
A GPL business model would seek to get its revenue from training, support, updates etc. Since revenue can't come from the code, it has to come from elsewhere.
-So, if you have a "left-leaning" view of the GPL, you make money off services.
-If you have a "right-leaning" view, you make money off products.
Take that horse for a ride(r)
In 2005 the core team at the time asked James Vasile, FSF lawyer and OSM board member (currently advising the core team on this matter) to help them write a rider for Joomla. The point of the rider was to grant an exception to extension developers so they could release their own software however they wanted, clearing up any legal ambiguity that might cause problems. It was added to the copyright in May, 2006.
In April 2007, the rider was removed from the copyright, and sparked a raging debate about whether extensions can be GPL. Its removal was the first step in a shift in Joomla's attitude towards non-GPL extensions, the final result was a statement that all extensions must be GPL to be legal.
To go back to our bell curve, I would say their shift looked something like this:
The Implications of Joomla's New Interpretation
OK, so in 2005 and 2006, Joomla had a viewpoint that favored non-GPL extensions. Up till now I hope I have been relatively unbiased. Here would be my first "opinion":
Joomla created an ecosystem where commercial and private interests lived alongside open source purists. That broad community reach allowed Joomla to go places other FOSS software couldn't, and the corporate sector is a place where Joomla still thrives to this day. It led to the flourishing of hundreds of commercial/proprietary extensions where end users could build an amazingly sophisticated site for a couple of hundred bucks.
This shift in policy seems to have had the effect of getting lots of 3rd party developers (3PD's) mad as bees. An organization has already been formed with close to 100 members, the Commercial Joomla Developers Alliance. As far as can be discerned, the most common frustration is that Joomla has changed the rules of the game at half time. These 3PD's spent the last 18 months building a business, and a certain extent, life, on the policy that Joomla was communicating. Now they will have to change how they do business to survive.
OK, here goes for my second opinion of what will happen.
- People will argue that the rider was or wasn't legal
- People will argue that extensions are or are not derivatives
- People will argue that this or that business model will work
There isn't much point; again, probably 50% of us will disagree! However, I think I can be more certain of this:
- Joomla has alienated its commercial/proprietary 3PD community
- Many 3PD will be unable or unwilling to make the changes to their business model to comply with Joomla's wishes.
- Some fraction of that will take some sort of action, ranging from forks, competing sites, litigation, stopping development for 1.5 or just walking away.
The core team has expressed that they think that this fraction will be small. Small enough that GPL compliant business models will rush to fill the void.
I am not sure that is the case. A non-GPL business model is easy to set up, that's why there were so many. We are already seeing just hours after Joomla's new policy statement 3PD's taking various types of action.
It's been claimed numerous times on the thread that it's possible to sell a GPL component and/or charge a membership for access to it. While technically true, it doesn't get you anywhere. Unfortunately human nature is not like that. In a very short period of time we'll be seeing all these GPL extensions available for free on various sites. You can't add enough value (updates, support and documentation) to compete with free. That's not a viable business model.
But what about the most important thing here, the community of end users?
Perhaps the biggest problem in all this is what will be the reaction of the end user? Its difficult to judge reading the GPL discussion thread. In forums people seem to think that if they shout their view loud enough it will become true. The loud voices drown out the silent majority.
Warning more opinions approaching.
Ironically, for an organization that chose an African translation of "All together" as its name (Joomla), I don't think the community of end users was really asked, or considered in all this. The core team has taken action that they strongly believe was in the best interest of the project. I am not sure it was in the best interest of end users. I have been contacted by many that have expressed this kind of sentiment.
(click to read some end user opinions)
The end users are in the middle of that bell curve, I would think most of them pretty ambivalent to the GPL's intricacies.
Moving forward, have the trenches been dug too deep?
There are always two sides to an issue. It's a little high minded to think that you are always "right". The world is not like that.
If Joomla wants to continue to grow and enjoy the success it has had in the last 18 months, it needs to find a compromise with the 3PD community. Whether it is currently comfortable with it philosophically or not, that community did contribute to the uptake and success of the CMS.
To reach a compromise you need to accept you can't have an inflexible absolute position. Both groups need to have an honest dialog about their needs and be willing to move towards a middle ground.
Unfortunately, I can't see this happening. I think we are going to see months of bitter wrangling that regardless of the outcome, which will do nothing but discourage end users and impair the projects growth.
Some footnotes
This shouldn't be about encryption
Developers encrypt for many reasons, primarily piracy. There are more ways to skin the open source cat like code escrow. Besides, the marketplace will decide that one, most end users don't like encryption.
This shouldn't be about contributing to the project
A small fraction of 3PD don't contribute much back to the project; most do. If Joomla wants to have more involvement, they should be using more carrot and less stick.
Show/Hide comments
smalcolm
said:
|
Ive seen similar situation in many types of organizations - they get internally focused and start fighting with each other around entrenched views on something that the 'end user' (read: website owner, customer, voter,... you name it) does not care one jot about. The result? end-user walks across the street and the organization suffers It's a pity. Ive just signed up to the facebook developer network and been very impressed at their vision of facebook as a next generation social-networking operating system. I can't help feeling that there has been a lack of vision and leadership in the Joomla! project over this issue that is a real missed opportunity. Hopefully it's not too late. Is it? |
TheJoomlaGuy
said:
|
In my years online I have noticed a specific piece of a puzzle that needs to be included in order for these opensource and web 2.0 projects to "explode." The mysterious puzzle piece that I'm talking about is... "a thriving internal economy." Joomla was doing great at this! With a perfect balance of new free gadgets and proprietary gadgets. To hear that they have just chopped the feet of all 3rd party developers really makes me want to run before the roof caves in. (I sell a video training course) Maybe it won't cave in, if anyone believes in Joomla it's me, but a red flag has been risen and another will surely chase me away. It's only my strong passion for Joomla and it's cause that is letting me give them the benefit of the doubt here. A wiser business man would see this as all he needs to "cross the street." Luckily, my business model is not directly affected... However, here's my take on whats happened and what is in store. All these big sites and projects today revolve around word of mouth advertising. Word of mouth is fabulous but it stops dead when one mouth stops "wording." This is where the economy and 3rd party developers come in. The 3rd party developers are making a profit and their business model needs and allows for them to advertise. I believe it is the 3PD's advertising that 1.) contributes to more (stronger) word of mouthing via new cool widgets 2.) starting new mouths by reaching them with their advertising. From the standpoint of the creator it must be hard to see others trying to profit from your hard work, but it's essential to embrace that. Those profiteers are improving your work. They are doing the constant market research to find out what your end users are wanting and giving it to them. They make your machine a giant by piling more and more new layers on top of it. It's basic leveraging. If you take away the 3rd party you are now left with the daunting work load of the constant pleasuring of your precious mouths so they will go out and word. Point blank...If you are not consistently making your project the next best thing, then the customers will go find the next best thing. The profiteers are there to help you constantly have the next best thing, there business model revolves around helping you do that. Follow me...? P.S. Sell the shovel, not the gold! Onwards and Upwards, Justin Brooke www.buildajoomlawebsite.com |
tamper
said:
|
I think your article gets the sentiment right. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter how the matter resolves itself. Since no-one seems to know how to definitively interpret the GPL (which itself is a ridiculous situation) the very fact that the debate has been raised is enough to spread sufficient fear, uncertainty and doubt for users (especially end-clients) to want to move on to something less contentious. It's no doubt been raised already, but isn't this exactly the kind of situation that led to Joomla's inception? Joomla needs 3PD extensions to complete in the CMS marketplace. Out of the box, it isn't a great CMS; saddled with poor user management and inflexible content structuring. Without the quality add-ons afforded by commercial development, it's going to be stuck with the small-time, mom-and-pop, church-newsletter-making, Microsoft-Publisher-using audience it has, and never really be taken seriously as an enterprise CMS platform. |
wonderwoman
said:
|
I am not completely surprised by the board's decision on the licensing issue. I started playing with Joomla around the time it split from Mambo and my understanding from what was posted in various forums was the split was due in large part to the $ issue. While I don't know the particulars, I have the sense that the board is attempting to stick to their core philosophy. What is disturbing from a users perspective is the disruption. I have already seen the odd 3PD throw in the towel and shut down their site. How many others will follow? Joomla has given my company the opportunity to be on the web and offer functionality that was just plain prohibitive to get any other way. Our very first website was several thousand dollars, and that was just a handful of brochure pages. We changed to Joomla and all sorts of opportunities opened up. Over time, we have gradually adopted a handful of commercial products, purely because the 3P was far superior to anything out there for free. Admittedly that is not true in all cases, but it is true in a large number of instances. I am intrigued the board has sanctioned 3PD's up until now - that is a change in direction that has HUGE implications across the community. I am not sure they really did want the community's input, as not a huge effort was made to solicit opinion. A discussion thread that spans a gazillion pages hardly encourages "the silent majority" to speak up. Simple 3-5 question polls were an option. I completely agree with Justin's statement that Joomla likely would not be anywhere near as large as it is without the 3PD community. I also believe the Joomla board could remain true to the license without chopping the legs out from under the 3PD - none of the products are compulsory. Joomla runs quite well without any of those extras. No-one forces users to take 3PD products, and the only reason people do is because the core Joomla product is weak in that particular area. Seems short-sighted to cut-off those that help grow your customer base. Perhaps they could have used a different engagement model with 3PD's. Perhaps a Joomla certification - 3PD's would be required to strengthen Joomla's weaknesses in exchange for the blessing of a certification for their product. Their own product could have richer functionality, but over time those fundamental weaknesses would be addressed in Joomla, and the 3PD's would be encouraged to develop more enhancements or innovations. |
Jooms.com
said:
| I just hope most 3pd developers adopt the new system or Joomla might just go the way of it's predecessor. |
jansie
said:
|
hi does anyone else see the pattern? first, a split from mambo, now, a split from their third party community. don't get me wrong. i'll swing both ways easily. in fact, we're currently working on an awesome plugin for joomla that we want to give away for free, as a thanks to the stuff we so readily get for free. but then again, man must eat. but change isn't always bad. it seems to always have it's victims though. i live in south africa. i know what change can do, but i'm also aware that, however painful it may be, it will happen. bend, or break. hope this gets sorted for all to score. would be terrible if joomla loses people like barrie north. barrie, i respect you almost as much as colonel sanders. hope you don't throw the baby out with the dirty water. if you do venture out into other waters, please let me know, so i can put my swimming trunks on. |
Jerry Roberts
said:
|
I'm just getting started with Joomla, and have a site in the production stage. Others are in the planning. I am extremely disappointed over this predicament and I'm not sure if I'm now willing to make a complete commitment to this platform. As Barrie noted in his opinion, end users just want the site to work and be reasonable in cost. We have no interest in intra-platform wars. From my limited perspective -- and I don't pretend that I know a lot about the specifics involved and certainly not the players -- the risk here is that likelihood that the golden goose will be killed in the skirmish. When battles like this continue, damage takes its toll in several ways as Barrie has noted. You've probably already lost a few developers or there are some who will now dedicate assets in another direction just to be safe. As well, some end users who shy away from these turf wars and just want simplicity have probably decided on other platforms. You've lost at least some momentum. If I understand some of the expert opinion I've read, Joomla had the opportunity to be the shining star of CMS apps and has been the best feelgood story in the business for a while. All the buzz was good. If you don't get to a table soon and work out the details, you'll do irreparable damage and everybody will lose. Did you work so hard and so successully for so long to let that happen? Maybe we need a third option. Purists for the GPL, third-party developers who have a right to make a profit, and something else that is akin to a neutral zone. I'm not sure what that is, but perhaps better minds than mine can figure that out. Maybe there are two versions of Joomla, one free and one for subscription ($50? -- to go to the Joomla core or end hunger, etc.) where the third party guys can do their thing in peace. Whatever you do, I'd suggest calling a cease fire, hire mediators and sit down N-O-W. Every day this battle rages, we all lose. |
bzsolt2
said:
| Soory, don't have time to go after this, What is the problem? As I read in prev compass newsl the problem is some don't want to see extension that are not free. This is the problem? Why is this a problem? Come on, let's do everybody what he wants. |
Vicki
said:
| As a business using Joomla I was about to spend $4000 getting two massive websites transferred to Joomla (templates and the like) but this is making me hestitate. I don't understand what it's all about (even after reading the above) but what I do get is that 1.5 may not be any good for my business sites (and current version may not continue working)... sad |
tracedog
said:
|
I like the current model - I like the fact that I can build sites for next to nothing. I like the fact that I can find free extensions and if I can't find it free, I can buy it. I like that. I like the fact that when I find an extension that works well, and it's free, that I can contribute to that project. I'm really not sure that I like where this whole topic is going.. --Comments from an End User... |
chaugo
said:
|
I have not read the whole controversy (I probably should, but who has time for that). Here is an end users take... The balance of 3PD commercial and GPL developers has working terrifically. Both groups are working hard to fine tune their model and attract new customers in an arena where people are looking for quality products at a low price. Those that create under GPL are always looking for better ways to service there products and those that work under commercial are always looking for more and more creative products to sell. Everyone benefits. Both groups need each other to be successful, they sharpen each other. I am not familiar with the foundation of Joomla or the legalities of how the licensed works, but they seem to have played the right note to attract both groups. And it has been to the benefit of many, many groups, both end users and developers. To change a working game plan at "half-time" (as someone posted), would seem to imply influence, by one party or the other, that was not in the best interest of the whole. |
dex1
said:
|
I hope this disagreement can be resolved and all the hardworking and bighearted people who work in and for the joomla community (core team, 3PDs, endusers...etc) can thrive. No matter how big your heart is, you still have to earn a crust, otherwise you won't belong to this community, let alone contribute to it. I for one am delighted to see free joomla components and equally delighted to pay for them, if they work. I don't think anyone is so idealist that they want everything for nothing? I am a Joomla implementor and customiser. I earn my living from Joomla. I believe in it. But it does need to treat everyone well. There must be a way that a level of commercialism can work alongside GPL. I am saddened and disheartened to see 3PDs walk away from this project. |
Graham Spice
said:
|
We discovered the core of the problem when we began considering the release of 1.5. There were lots of coders out there volunteering their time to the project and sending in great ideas but they had not agreed to give it all away via the GPL. Not to mention that there are lots of countries that do not have the same kind of copyright law that exists in the US, the home of the Open Source Matters incorporation. Joomla core team members were rightfully concerned that releasing this updated version without getting EVERYONE that contributed one line character of code to sign a waiver to the GPL would jeopardize the project's existence. Now the debate has moved into the 3PD world....again, rightfully so. How can you create a "plugin" for a framework that is GPL and not consider that plugin be a derivative work? The plugin relies on the Joomla framework to function and that framework will be GPL. It is hard for me to believe that the courts wouldn't make this connection, also...at least a US court. So what to do? If the project wants to continue, perhaps it needs to devise a new licensing model. Not that the open-source world NEEDS another license but it seems that GPL will actually stifle the project's ability to continue. Since that is the case, I believe that creating a new license that somehow allows for commercial plugins to be created and sold without requiring the right to distribute them. This is unavoidable....I just hope everyone keeps a level head. Otherwise, there will be so many forks, spoons and knives of our favorite project that none of these 3PD extensions will run correctly! Tough times ahead, Joomlers. Keep your heads up, keep your motivations true and let's lead the way this time! |
cfoxgrover
said:
|
This is difficult situation to comment on if one is not an intense participant in the Joomla community. I run one site in Joomla and would consider it for more but frankly my personal opinion is that a commercial model that is too strong is not good for the small time developer/manager like me. In the end I would end up with too many products with different development paths with no way to hope that the community itself could solve a problem. I'm not deeply involved like most of you but I feel more comfortable in principle with the core teams position that my personal investment in the platform will be rewarded with more open and more standard extension development, like I see with Drupal. You may feel free to correct my mistaken understanding of the issues, but this has been my gut reaction to the situation that has arisen. |
thinkdave
said:
|
On the whole, the commercial extensions I've bought for Joomla have been of excellent quality. For a non-developer like me they're easy to implement and I get really helpful technical support from the people selling them. On the other hand, I've also used some great free extensions, but often something is lacking (especially in the areas of support and documentation). If Joomla takes the decision to prevent commercial extension developers from earning their living doing what they do best, I think you're going to see an overall decline in the quality of the end product. Why would you give anything back if you weren't making anything in the first place? You could also take the point of view that Joomla allows Web designers to profit from template design, customization, site management and training. Joomla also allows authors to profit from writing and selling Joomla manuals & e-books. So why shouldn't programmers be allowed to profit from what they do best? The bottom line is that people need money to thrive. That's capitalism. And while open source is great, it needs to be supported by a community that can benefit from it, and make money from it. |
logz05
said:
|
As a designer that makes a living of implementing Joomla! websites for clients I find this very disturbing. Is this the thin end of the wedge? Will the Joomla core team suddenly turn around in a couple of years time and say that I have to donate my time? The answer is probably no - but the point is that a U-turn in policy is at the very least disruptive and a show stopper for people who base their business model on Joomla. It also generates enough concern for a designer like me to start to look at alternatives in order to secure an income flow for the future. The net effect may well be to push skilled developers to other CMS solutions (dare one mention Mambo as an option). I want the freedom of choice to purchase or not. |
tezza
said:
|
A license could be considdered a bit like software. It uses an algorithm to support a relationship between the distributer/vendor and their customer/user. As with software, many licenses are not perfect and need debugging. Some (including the GPL) even have version numbers which show this. I've seen GPL hurt projects before due to it's viral approach. This approach seems to be precipitated from a polarised view of the world. I think some simple application of the socratic method in Joomla's case would see a solution to this problem. 1) People developed joomla to make CMS users happy 2) The GPL license is disrupting the ability for Joomla to reach it's potential to make users happy (by corroding it's community). 3) There are licensing solutions out there that would protect the Joomla code while also protecting it's ENTIRE community. 4) The Joomla team owns the Joomla code, they can change the license if they want to. So what are we waiting for? In the announcement at http://www.joomla.org/content/view/3510/1/ It seems like the joomla boys are labouring under the misconception that it's too hard to change once you use GPL. Isn't that more of a reason to break free from it's grip? It's your code, do with it what you will in order to further the Joomla cause. They talk about "the authority" to make exceptions blah blah blah... Hang on a minute, the FSF doesn't own the code, the Joomla developers do. If the license is limiting you, then ditch it. If ditching it will be perceived as hurting the GPL, then maybe it's time that the FSF applied the socratic method to improving the GPL. IMO, it's the license itself that needs to change or die, not 3PDs. Just accepting the limitations that are causing so much damage is not very acceptable I think. It's plain as day. The GPL is not a good fit, there are plenty of existing licences that are. Joomla should be the people going across the road to get another license. It only takes will-power to either switch to one of them, or make up a custom one - the "Joomla Licence". One that will keep communities "all together". |
fabs
said:
|
I am no commercial dev at all but I strongly disagree with JOomla Core teams actions.. How dare they restrict a project in the way they do? I thought Joomla was about freedom? FOr almost every commercial component there are several gpl alternative components some times less sophisticated but sometime also more sophisticated. Many components start commercial and as time goes by similar gpl components pop up. and often gpl stuff is not sophisticated enough and someone really invests loads of time and makes a really sophisticated commercial comonent out of it... all that is just positive and contributing soooo much to Joomla! I just cannot believe the way the core team handles the issue! What will come is that some disagrreing core member at some stage will fork Joomla once more .. that would be very unfortunate and weaken the community a lot. Right now when everybody should be concentrating on pushing Joomla 1.5 final to finally come to existence this discussion seems suicidal in my eyes!!!!! |
mudoch
said:
|
Barrie; You're right EVERYONE is going to see their point of view, not Joomla's. The really though area is going to be the "derivative of" interpretation. I may be opening a can of worms here but.... If add-ons are to be considered as a derivative of the core product then if I write a application using the API if Windows would it not be termed a derivative work? My app can not work without the windows API so how could I distribute/sell that application under any other licensing? Ok maybe MS License does not have a clause about derivatives, this does raise another question how can anyone charge for an application running on Linux? At the most basic level any application relying on the existence of Linux, FreeBSD, Ubuntu must be offered under the GPL. At the very least Joomla! has upset folks. I'm glad they have at least had the hutzpa to try and be clear about how they will manage the product. There are questions the lawyers are going to have to iron out and in the meantime we the end users will only become confused by what is and what was available to make a quality site. For me Joomla! is a good solution as it provides a wide selection of options and ease of management. It misses on several points that I consider needed for a good CMS but it is a good compromise so no complaints. |
tomt
said:
|
I'm very pleased with the way the Joomla! coreteam handled this case. And I'm very amazed about the hostile reactions of many commercial developers. And I get very tired by the misuse of the word Freedom. Fredom is not an absolute thing, it's allways relative. I have bought commercial extensions, even during the heated discussion, but I don't hink they are essential to Joommla. Of the extensions I consider essential to creating flexible websites with Joomla! only one is commercial and I wouldn't be surprised if the developers are going to comply to the GPL. If the coreteam really was so unreasonable, the reactions would be different: the comdev's would go to another CMS. But they know they're likely to find the same discussion there. |
Judy Gunter
said:
|
I need to know if this issue is resolved or still continuing. Soon I will be entering a contract to develop 4 websites using Joomla. What are my rights as a webmaster? I believe most of the addons will be free. Suppose I have to use a commercial addons. Then what? Should I hold off the contract to be on the safe side? JSG |
Dark Phoenix
said:
| Okay, I'm going to tell you straight up at the beginning, I'm an Open Source developer, and I release most of my work under the GPL. However, I believe in this case the GPL is the wrong licence to be using; the core team should likely look into using the LGPL or the MIT licence instead (which allow both GPL and commercial components), or maybe consider a dual-licence like the one the Mozilla project uses. |
John R Wilson
said:
|
There seems to be a lot of confusion here about the GPL, most of it caused, by all appearances by the Joomla development team itself. Before I go further though I wish to address the issue of the "viral" GPL. The GPL is only "viral", which is a lovely bit of Microsoft inspired FUD, in the sense that if you add code to a piece of GPL software that code itself must be licensed under the GPL. If you're programming to a published API, for example, the Linux kernel, you're not obligated to license your work as GPL because you haven't changed the GPL licensed code. The license itself makes both things clear. The former formally and clearly, the other informally and by reference. As for the issue with Joomla, judging from the posted comments there it appears that the Joomla Development Team, themselves may have been encouraging things that violated the GPL and now they're scrambling to correct it. In fairness, I'd suggest that they must grandfather the current crop of commercial licensed add ons that they themselves encouraged. I'd also suggest quite strongly that third party developers investigate OSDN approved open source licenses like the BSD and Apache licenses that address most if not all of the concerns expressed here. Equally, people like TheJoomlaGuy also need to understand that not all the gee whiz bang stuff comes from commercial developers. Open source itself is just as good at that as closed source is. Sometimes better. Joomla itself, for example. Offensive as it may seem to some, I don't really care what your business model is. That's your choice and you get to sink or swim with that choice. What does concern me is that, by the Joomla Development Teams own admission you've all been playing the game by the rules as you understood them and as advised by the Joomla team. That being the case at the very least you ought to be grandfathered. And Joomla has to come with a fully published set of APIs that allow you to continue without being put in a position of violating the license that Joomla developers, jointly and severally, have chosen. I agree with those who are saddened by this and encourage everyone to work on a fair and long lasting resolution to this mess. For everyone. |
David 'skOre' Deutsch
said:
| and there goes my compass subscription. What a useless conglomeration of FUD that has been dispatched ages ago and even in the threads on joomla.org. This is not helping and you guys know it - if you want to earn money, try to make it right and not the way its most comfortable for you. |
Claude la France
said:
|
The word FREE in Open Source stands for FREEDOM. You read this literally everywhere you go on the net. Free does not mean “no cost, no value or no chargeâ€. If the Open Source community imposes the GPL license on commercial developers where is the freedom? If the GPL license is forcibly enforced “across the board†then we should expect those “enterprising†developers (who value their work and for which people in the OS community are prepared to and do pay “fair market valueâ€) to go and sell their skills, talent, knowledge and experience elsewhere… and who knows, worse still, go back to the private sector “monopoliesâ€. Whose loss? Whose gain? Nobody (almost) works for free! Every person has the right to be paid for the work that they do. Are commercial component developers any different? Are they the exception? What makes living off of donations more acceptable? What is more acceptable about any other form of compensation? Is one business model better than the other? Why are commercial licenses so unacceptable? What is the Open Source community so afraid of? Freedom? Where is the freedom? Or are we just paying “lip serviceâ€? Free markets thrive and prosper. The world around us is living proof. Totalitarian states shrivel and die. The world around us is further proof. Open Source is gaining ground and maybe even poised to win the battle against the profit driven monoliths. Is this the time to betray the fundamental principle of freedom which is the very source of its strength? The self destruct instinct is in each and every one of us. Joomla is no exception. How unfortunate it should manifest on the heels of such a stellar performance. And how sad for all those people, developers and users alike, who will see their dreams shattered yet one more time! |
admin
said:
|
FUD? I think you are missing the point. I don't make a living through commercial extensions. I am trying to present both viewpoints and let the reader decide. I am pretty sure I have not said anything that can't be backed up. I am cool with if you have an opinion... good for you. I am less cool with you asserting that there is a "right" way to do anything... I'd also add that I think your "right" opinion is out of step with what most end users want. Try reading some of these comments. |
roquebrune
said:
|
The problem with Open Source. Open Source is a wondrous thing. Anyone who has ever despaired at the thought that money, and only money, drives this world need only look to what’s happening in the Open Source community to know that this world is full of people ready to give of themselves, generously, selflessly, in a bid to make this world a better place in which to live. Open Source stands as a beacon of light in a dark and tempestuous sea of greed and profiteering! So, is Open Source the Shangri La we all seek? Possibly, but Open Source does have its dark side! How so? Imagine you ask someone to do some work for you. It could be as simple as asking someone you know, maybe a friend, to come and help you move. You offer to pay them. They refuse obstinately. They will do this for you but as a favor only. You accept, but not without a slight misgiving. What if on moving day they change their mind about helping you? What if between now and moving day their feelings for you change for the worse. Then, you’ll be in trouble, BIG trouble. Moving day arrives, your friend bails out on you. It’s at that point that you chastise yourself because if you had hired a professional mover, someone who was going to charge you a fair amount for the work involved, this would not have happened. And so it is with Joomla. Promises were made (riders written and inserted) in good faith. Commitments to everlasting friendship vowed. But there was no fair exchange. Joomla gave us something, developers and users alike, and asked for nothing but our gratitude in return. We were in Joomla’s debt. And now, Joomla like the friend who was going to help us move, has decided to withdraw its offer of help. And, all those who built their lives and businesses around this offer are at Joomla’s mercy, literally. We are left “high and dryâ€. Maybe the reason money drives the world is because it makes a fair exchange possible and does away with the indebtedness of one party to the other. After all, it’s challenging enough to run a business without this sort of indebtedness which leaves you at the mercy of one of your principal suppliers. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. This is Open Source and Joomla’s weakest link. Now that the link is about the break all those people running real businesses will want to sit down and think whether they can really afford to live with this uncertainty and threat. Even if Joomla backtracks! The weakness in the link has been exposed. We can ignore it or deal with it. |
Ron C
said:
|
I have no problem paying for quality extensions. I have bought some lemons, but t no one is making anyone purchase commercial extensions or use commercial templates. TEveryone is free to use Joomla out of the box and tailor it to their own needs. If yu don't like the commercial extensions, don't buy them, what's the big deal? I don't expect any developer to spend that much time on something they cannot benefit from. I sure am not a developer, but I do appreciate all of the options that Joomla allows me to chose from. If the 3PDs disappear, I think Joomla will lose it's appeal...for me anyway ...after all the extensions and flexibility is what attracted me to Joomla. How hard can it be to come to terms that everyone is happy with? |
Show/Hide comment form
