• Welcome to Simple Machines Community Forum. Please login or sign up.
December 02, 2021, 07:49:43 AM

News:

Want to get involved in developing SMF, then why not lend a hand on our github!


Joomla & SMF - this is a disaster !

Started by joejackson, July 25, 2007, 12:45:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Kindred

it might be possible to do this. However, doing so means that you are ignoring all of SMF's integration hooks and basically having to recode all database interactions...
Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.<br /><br />"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

antracit

Quote from: Kindred on July 27, 2007, 04:21:02 PM
it might be possible to do this. However, doing so means that you are ignoring all of SMF's integration hooks and basically having to recode all database interactions...

I Hi

I've tested it and no hooks (?) and only interaction is onway, importing SMF members into moodle. The rest i RSS and feeds. No fancy looks but working.

Just looking farward, and Mambo is backwards these days.

//johan

Kindred

but for real integration with smf user levels, permissions, etc, we have all those nice hooks in place.

and, despite the fact that I prefer joomla myself, mambo is not at all backward. Mambo 4.6.2 and eventually mambo 4.7 is a nice step forward.
Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.<br /><br />"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

AmyStephen

Quote from: vancanneyt on July 27, 2007, 09:26:03 AM
i thought mambo is also GPL so it still illegal also.

This is, unfortunately, correct. The note from the FSF that SMF provided did not discuss Joomla!, at all. It was about bridging GPL and non-GPL compliant software. The FSF indicated the manner in which the SMF bridges have been built is, indeed, a violation of the GPL. That is true for all four of SMF's bridges into GPL environments.

Some projects have indicated they will allow the GPL to be violated. Mambo is one of those projects. They have indicated they will not pursue compliance. It is possible third party library copyright holders could ask for compliance, though.

Those of you Joomla!/SMF users who are not wanting to find another CMS - hang in there. There is still hope - not everyone has given up on this. It's a challenge, but not an impossible one. Hopefully, all four bridges could come into compliance at once!

Post in at Joomla! land, too, and make certain people there understand your concerns and that solutions can be made available to you.

Amy :)

karlbenson

July 27, 2007, 05:54:45 PM #44 Last Edit: July 27, 2007, 05:56:36 PM by karlbenson
I don't think anyone is giving up hope.  SMF team members have indicated a willingness to listen to any ideas for ways around the licensing issues. (Note further up, I even suggested posting a list of all the ideas we are coming up with).

If you are a member of 'Joomla! land' then let them know, ask them for ideas for solutions. (and anyone else who might have an idea) Two heads are better than one and all that.

Again, just to CORRECT
There is NO issue with Mambo, they have the authority to grant an exception.
Whereas Joomla themselves indicate they DO NOT have the authority (hence why they are having to use the pure/strict GPL which doesnt allow exceptions).  Third parties don't have to ask for compliance - they can just SUE.  Invariably it makes financial sense for them.

The current issue ONLY affects the Joomla bridge.

I really hope a solution can be found.  SMF will be the better for it, and Joomla likewise.  Unfortunately until we discover a means, SMF must and should ensure compliance.

Jeff Lewis

For now, people should hang in there and wait it out. There are ongoing discussions on a few fronts and where those will go, nobody knows.

However, there is a lot of misinformation being thrown around and in any situation that's an unhealthy thing.

Saying "he said", "she said" doesn't do anyone any good. Apparently there may be a crack in the wall, and we'll continue to explore options.
Co-Founder of SMF

Stallyon

I don't mean to be starting a "he said/she said" argument, I just gave input at what I seen over at Joomla forums. Maybe those at Joomla also need to stop with the blame game and "he said/she said" arguments too. Working together will bring some sort of solution eventually. I wish both parties the best of luck, and really hope a solution can be reached.
Kris Bell
Dahulu Tim Penerjemah Bahasa Indonesia (Former Indonesian Translation Team)
stallyon@bigpond.com

Tidak menerima pesan pribadi (PM) jika tidak diminta (no unsolicited private messages)

Attention: Spelling errors in this message are the product of a poor school system. Pay teachures more than athleets.

Jeff Lewis

Quote from: Stallyon on July 27, 2007, 07:25:23 PM
I don't mean to be starting a "he said/she said" argument, I just gave input at what I seen over at Joomla forums. Maybe those at Joomla also need to stop with the blame game and "he said/she said" arguments too. Working together will bring some sort of solution eventually. I wish both parties the best of luck, and really hope a solution can be reached.

Was directed in general, not at anyone in particular.

However, I agree, both sides need to and will work together. Both sides WANT a solution, all that is left is to find out what that solution may be.
Co-Founder of SMF

antracit

July 28, 2007, 03:53:58 AM #48 Last Edit: July 28, 2007, 05:12:37 AM by antracit
Quote from: Kindred on July 27, 2007, 05:20:45 PM
but for real integration with smf user levels, permissions, etc, we have all those nice hooks in place.

and, despite the fact that I prefer joomla myself, mambo is not at all backward. Mambo 4.6.2 and eventually mambo 4.7 is a nice step forward.

Hi

User level, permission and all that is just why I use SMF. Thats the fare best solutions I've tested. Coppermine Gallery (also in use) got that kind of system to (disabled by bridge now).

Joomla and Mambo (not what I know) has no such advanced futures, big disadvantage on both. Moodle do.

For me changing from one CMS to another must lead forward and that's a better ACL or what you prefer to call it.

Q?
Still, the way Moodle do this, is that against the whole issue here, GPL and that (SMF I mean)? Calling tables in the SMF database to get authenticated?

If that's not the case (=ok), I would love to se Joomla/Mambo or any good CMS work the same way.

[edited some poor english]

//johan

Sundog_AK

Although this is my first post in this forum, I have been using SMF and Joomla for just under a year and both are excellent programs.  So even though I am a "one poster", I have "lurked" around for most of that time and pretty much was able to learn what I needed from the excellent support forums here without the need to really post (i.e., all my questions were typically asked prior).  I am just a "little guy" user using Menalto Gallery, SMF, and Joomla for a family web site.  I am amazed at the amount of resources that people expend on all these programs from the developers side of things.  It is a lot of free time that is devoted to make quality programs. 

However, I was disheartened to hear that the bridge between the two is discontinued.  I have read quite a few posts on both the Joomla and SMF forums regarding licensing in general as well as specific to SMF/Joomla.  I have my opinions on the real reasons of how things got to this point but I will not retread what has already been said.   But I will say that I completely understand SMF's position in taking the position they have.

In the end, I just want to put in my "vote" (for all it is worth) as a newbie "End User" that I hope that the issues can eventually be resolved like Jeff mentioned in the prior posts.  My limited memory capacity (human RAM) is not up to learning another CMS and/or forum  :D

Cheers,
Chris

cferd

Quote from: AmyStephen on July 27, 2007, 05:44:56 PM
This is, unfortunately, correct. The note from the FSF that SMF provided did not discuss Joomla!, at all. It was about bridging GPL and non-GPL compliant software. The FSF indicated the manner in which the SMF bridges have been built is, indeed, a violation of the GPL. That is true for all four of SMF's bridges into GPL environments.

Some projects have indicated they will allow the GPL to be violated. Mambo is one of those projects. They have indicated they will not pursue compliance. It is possible third party library copyright holders could ask for compliance, though.

Amy :)
No offense, but you seem to come accross to me as someone who's more than happy to just keep blindly attacking Mambo.

I'm guessing by the tone of your posts, you know matter-of-factly that what Mambo is doing is illegal. Has FSF at any point adviced Mambo that they may be playing with fire? I mean, it is crystal clear to me by now that Mambo will continue to allow non-GPL plugins. Surely, FSF must know already whether there could be trouble for them or not.

I believe I remember reading something in the license about "interpretation". Every license holder is free to interpret it anyway they see fit. Why is that so hard to understand?
Joomla is interpreting it the way they want or feel is best for them and their users, and Mambo is seeing it the way they feel best for them. I seriously doubt that the single entity holding the Mambo copyright will shatter into bits and pieces and then procede to start suing left and right.

Joomla is just fine the way I see it, and Mambo is NOT doing anything wrong because they see thing different than Joomla or you. Can we try and bite the bullet for once and respect that?

Ferd

redone

Quote from: Jeff Lewis on July 27, 2007, 07:34:21 PM
Quote from: Stallyon on July 27, 2007, 07:25:23 PM
I don't mean to be starting a "he said/she said" argument, I just gave input at what I seen over at Joomla forums. Maybe those at Joomla also need to stop with the blame game and "he said/she said" arguments too. Working together will bring some sort of solution eventually. I wish both parties the best of luck, and really hope a solution can be reached.
Jeff is right. If a solution can be found then it will be pursued.


Was directed in general, not at anyone in particular.

However, I agree, both sides need to and will work together. Both sides WANT a solution, all that is left is to find out what that solution may be.

elfishtroll

July 28, 2007, 01:35:45 PM #52 Last Edit: July 28, 2007, 01:49:26 PM by Orstio


The problem is not GPL or even Joomla's stance on same.

The problem is, as you have seen in the FSF blog responses, is that the 'definition' of 'derivative work' can change at a whim (and has, in Joomla's case)

Combine this shifting stance with a constant stream of disingenuous dissembling from the Joomla! powers, "Blackwhitespeak" from their appointed "unofficial spokesmen/women/other" and of course the Orwellian editing of their own forums*&nbsp; create an environment which is not only UNFRIENDLY to business, commercial exploitation or use of "their" baby, but to just about ANY development or USE that conflicts with the WOFTD (Whim of the Day)



* The long running debate forums on Joomla's New Stance on the GPL&nbsp; have been summarily closed and more ominously, MOVED to a backwater location on the site.

Why?
As George Orwell himself wrote so eloquently in the book 1984 there is no need to LIE when you can REWRITE THE TRUTH:D

by moving the forums, they have invalidated the entire internet that links to those posts (without having to make them 'disappear') this serves the dual purpose of hiding the truth and discrediting the poster who links to those posts as proof! :P

The first REAL thing to realize is that RESOURCES ARE FINITE

Second thing: as far as alternatives go, the DIFFERENCES BETWEEN Joomla and Mambo are ridiculously trivial.

The fork between Joomla and Mambo was an idealogical not Technological split and 90% of extensions work for either "CMS" without modification, therefore, a choice or choosing between Mambo or Joomla, hinges upon issues only a religious zealot would fine significant :D

In any event, it seems to me, that Joomla! has lost the moral high ground and have become the "Evil Empire" bloated with the self aggrandisement that Mambo was 'known' to be!

Logically, it makes no sense to persist in banging your head against an intransigent Joomla wall when an almost identical (and less resource consuming&nbsp; solution) exists next door?

Granted, the relationship between Joomla and SMF has been less than smooth.

After trying in vain to get some technical guidance from the Joomla team regarding interfacing with J 1.5, Orsitio (somewhat rashly) posted that there may be NO joomla bridge from SMF for J1.5.
The resulting recriminations from angry users who (rightly or wrongly) laid the fault at the feet of the Joomla devs, left a bitter feeling in the mouths (keyboards?)

Can anyone think it a COINCIDENCE that the latest version INVALIDATES and renders INOPERABLE just about EVERY CURRENTLY EXISTING BRIDGE SOLUTION?

[EDIT by Orstio -- removed offensive image]

joejackson

There's so much smoke and mirrors around this subject its more like a Vegas Magicians Convention than anything else. :)

Consider this scenario for a moment.....

If I was more or less controlling the overall development of a piece of software, ........ and if I had ambitions to release an additionally featured commercial product alongside the free version, .......I'd make damn sure that the free product stood on its own unfettered with any other software that could remotely be considered non GPL compliant.

As a businessman this would be a sound strategical decision.

Do not misunderstand me, I'm not saying this is the Joomla teams motivation, but I can show factual historical evidence that supports this model in dozens of software life-cycle and it could be applied to the current situation, but that is for others to decide upon, not me.

I'm only pointing out one possible aspect of a scenario that without any doubt whatsoever has underlying issues that are not yet in the public domain.

AmyStephen

Quote from: cferd on July 28, 2007, 12:47:37 PM
Quote from: AmyStephen on July 27, 2007, 05:44:56 PM
This is, unfortunately, correct. The note from the FSF that SMF provided did not discuss Joomla!, at all. It was about bridging GPL and non-GPL compliant software. The FSF indicated the manner in which the SMF bridges have been built is, indeed, a violation of the GPL. That is true for all four of SMF's bridges into GPL environments.

Some projects have indicated they will allow the GPL to be violated. Mambo is one of those projects. They have indicated they will not pursue compliance. It is possible third party library copyright holders could ask for compliance, though.

Amy :)
No offense, but you seem to come accross to me as someone who's more than happy to just keep blindly attacking Mambo.

I'm guessing by the tone of your posts, you know matter-of-factly that what Mambo is doing is illegal. Has FSF at any point adviced Mambo that they may be playing with fire?

Ferd -

My sincere apologies! Mambo is doing nothing wrong, at all! In fact, the license holder in these examples is not violating the license. Neither is the end user. It's actually the one distributing the bridge. This is the concern.

The email between SMF and FSF discussed a method used to connect GPL and non-GPL compliant software via a bridge. In that conversation, the FSF indicated that method would result in a violation of the GPL. This violation happens when the bridge is distributed.

This is relevant for any SMF bridge into any GPL environment given the approach discussed by in the SMF/FSF email. Some projects have indicated they will ignore these infractions of the license. 

Technically, the license holder isn't interpreting the terms of the license. The terms are the same, regardless. The copyright holder is choosing whether or not to enforce the terms.

There is no one to attack; just clarifying information.
Amy :)

AmyStephen

Quote from: Jeff Lewis on July 27, 2007, 07:34:21 PM
Quote from: Stallyon on July 27, 2007, 07:25:23 PM
I don't mean to be starting a "he said/she said" argument, I just gave input at what I seen over at Joomla forums. Maybe those at Joomla also need to stop with the blame game and "he said/she said" arguments too. Working together will bring some sort of solution eventually. I wish both parties the best of luck, and really hope a solution can be reached.

Was directed in general, not at anyone in particular.

However, I agree, both sides need to and will work together. Both sides WANT a solution, all that is left is to find out what that solution may be.

This is good, good news and I am confident a solution will result. Thanks so much to the SMF group!
Amy :)

Omega X

Oh well, I knew that this was coming.

I've been considering going back to Mambo for some time now. And this announcement only gives me the go ahead.

As for any compromise, since Joomla won't allow exception to their interpretation to the license I can't even see SMF being bridged with Joomla again. I doubt that SMF will change their license after deciding on it long ago.


AmyStephen

Quote from: Omega X on July 28, 2007, 06:23:33 PM
As for any compromise, since Joomla won't allow exception to their interpretation to the license I can't even see SMF being bridged with Joomla again. I doubt that SMF will change their license after deciding on it long ago.

Omega -

There will be no reason for anyone to change or to compromise their license. There are ways to do this that meet the requirements of both licenses.  As Jeff indicated, there are discussions, again, between SMF and Joomla!. People are trying to find ways to make this work, given the terms of each software license.

This will be behind us. It will get resolved. No one will have to compromise their license or grant exceptions, either. The solution will be compliant. Wait and see!
Amy :)

Omega X

Quote from: AmyStephen on July 28, 2007, 06:36:29 PM
Quote from: Omega X on July 28, 2007, 06:23:33 PM
As for any compromise, since Joomla won't allow exception to their interpretation to the license I can't even see SMF being bridged with Joomla again. I doubt that SMF will change their license after deciding on it long ago.

Omega -

There will be no reason for anyone to change or to compromise their license. There are ways to do this that meet the requirements of both licenses.  As Jeff indicated, there are discussions, again, between SMF and Joomla!. People are trying to find ways to make this work, given the terms of each software license.

This will be behind us. It will get resolved. No one will have to compromise their license or grant exceptions, either. The solution will be compliant. Wait and see!
Amy :)

I've been waiting and seeing since the very beginning of this silly escapade.

Bottom Line: Orstio has discontinued the bridge for Joomla. The End.

When Orstio announces a new bridge version for Joomla then I will happily install it. Until then, I already have a deadline for removing Joomla from my installs.

Kindred

AmyStephem,

You keep bringing up Mambo or other GPL pieces...  However, all those other GPL softwares have the right to interpret the GPL differently than Joomla and/or include an exception.

In the case of Mambo, thye have specifically indicated that they do not interpret the GPL in the same way, and they welcome 3rd party development. Therefor, there is no problem with developing (and distributing) a bridge for mambo.
Please do not PM, IM or Email me with support questions.  You will get better and faster responses in the support boards.  Thank you.<br /><br />"Loki is not evil, although he is certainly not a force for good. Loki is... complicated."

Advertisement: