|
|
GPL compliance - disappointment and concern - 2007/06/22 15:34
Just a couple of thoughts from a mid profile Joomla dev (i prefer to label what i do as "code assemblage", anyways).
What a bad luck.
Both to-be commercial components i am currently in need of the most, Gmaps Pro and Mikkos's APC, are not released due to the ongoing debate about licensing. A pity, really.
I fail to realize what's so dramatic in releasing commercial open source, specially when the ownership of the code is kept intact or the usage rules can be set at will by the authors.
What's the big deal if another dev is knowledgeable enough to read your source code, study it and launch a Gmaps fork? He/she will have to abide by the GPL, meaning that you guys could also benefit from any innovation contributed by that dev and bring it in your own extension.
This is the way GPL'ed FOSS has always worked and the core dev team is striving to enforce it, in my modest opinion rightfully.
What if Joomla itself was partially obfuscated and Google decided to turn off the Maps API tap? Would there be any room left for Gmaps Pro?
Are you afraid of the license that made Joomla, Linux and other major software achievements the mature community products we all know and love or you do not know exactly what in your code could infringe the GPL?
I am a sincere fan of the work you guys have been developing and do not mind at all paying the price you set and respect the licensing terms.... As a matter of fact, i have to 
I just would ask you to enlighten me on the questions raised above.
If my assumptions are wrong, please accept my excuses beforehand.
It is your absolute right to make your code available under the terms and conditions you consider more appropriate and when you want. However, do not implicitly blame the release delay on lack of guidelines from the Core devs. GPL, like any other free software license, is a social contract. A compund of rules you are well aware of.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
|
Re:GPL compliance - disappointment and concern - 2007/06/22 20:00
I don't believe we have said that 'pro' will not be released, but merely delayed. If that was confusing, my apologies.
I don't disagree with your comments. I also don't mind people being able to read the code which is why I would never obfuscate the code. people can learn from other people's code. Lord knows I've done the same.
The issue is, and has been, since the I released GMaps, my time to provide support. Everyone likes to get the extension for free, but don't want to donate or whatever to help offset the support costs. I firmly believe in providing the best support I can but it costs me in time/money as our core business doesn't get the attention it needs. I can't provide the support I desire for free and continue to focus on our business. We need to ensure some level of compensation for our time to provide support for any extension, even free, GPL'd extensions.
This is why a "subscription" model is under consideration where all the extensions we wish to release, the subscriber may access and will get free support. If we feel that going that route can make it feasible to release, then we will; otherwise, we might prefer to keep the extension for ourselves on projects we are engaged on (see bandrescue.com). We just need to do the analysis on this and determine what is best for our business. Another option is that we just release the code GPL and then sell support and documentation (similar to the Red Hat model I believe).
I might try this subscription model with the CB/GMaps plugin and see how that works out. That plugin is complete and will be beta tested by a friend of mine at http://www.stjoepark.com
I hope that answers what you were looking for. If not, I'll try to explain better on another post. Got a lot going on right now.
Feel free to email me if you wish.
Chris
Post edited by: cs1559, at: 2007/06/22 20:24
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
|
Re:GPL compliance - disappointment and concern - 2007/06/23 08:18
cs1559 wrote:
I might try this subscription model with the CB/GMaps plugin and see how that works out. That plugin is complete and will be beta tested by a friend of mine at http://www.stjoepark.com
Whatever decision you make, be sure to count me among the first subscribers/buyers.
I do not question the legitimacy of charging for an application one has invested time and effort developing.
The FSF always made clear that free software is mainly a matter of freedom, not price.
Thank you so much for answering.
Cheers,
Nuno.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
|
Re:GPL compliance - disappointment and concern - 2007/06/23 08:41
Not a problem on answering. To be honest, the biggest concern I do have is with distribution. I don't mind people viewing the code and adapting it to meet their needs which is what I think is core to the concept of "freedom". My thinking is that if I want to recoup my time for development and support, and keep the price as low as possible, I'd like to be able to control distribution. That doesn't mean a commercial licensed Joomla extension won't be passed around either. So maybe my concerns are a non-issue.
We just need to see if/what model works. If you have a specific opinion on what model may work, feel free to share your thoughts with me. You can email me at chris@firestorm-technologies.com. Input is always welcome.
Just out of curiousity, are you more interested in the 'pro' version of GMaps or the CB plugin?
Chris
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
|
Re:GPL compliance - disappointment and concern - 2007/06/23 08:52
Just an aside, the majority of the "backend" of GMapsPRO is done and now I'm focusing on the "frontend" administration portions. I've added some things that I hadn't planned on like doubleclick zoom, map overview and an easy way to include Google "My Maps" maps (I'm hopefully).
Chris
The administrator has disabled public write access.
|
|
