Zikula Community

• craigh
  
  

  • Rank: Developer
  • Registered: Jun 16, 2003
  • Last visit: May 29, 2010
  • Posts: 1966

  Posted: Sep 24, 2003 - 10:26 AM

  Dear Mr/Ms pnDevs...
  
  I would draw your attention to this thread and ask you to consider the ideas presented.
  
  thank you.

  • 
  •  
• markwest
  
  

  • Rank: Team Member
  • Registered: Mar 18, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 6606

  Posted: Sep 24, 2003 - 08:29 PM

  This is a complex issue that there is no simple 'right' answer too.
  
  My personal opinion is that in many ways commercial modules are good for PN. By this I mean modules that provide business services e.g. realty modules etc. If a site admin is going to make money from the site why whould the modules that are generating the money not make a little money for the developer as well. Many of these modules show off the strengths of PN due to the time spent developing them that a 'free module' might never have seen.
  
  There will always be people out there that will develop modules freely. In many cases a person might see a module they like, find it's a commercial module and then code thier own free version.
  
  At the end of the day it comes down to two basic points.
  
  1. A developer is free to charge for a module if they feel that the they require re-imbursement for the time spent developing it. Many developers spend very long hours coding. These modules don't just 'happen'. In many cases a module/theme or whatever simply wouldn't exisit if the coder/designer couldn't seek re-imbursement for thier efforts.
  
  2. The legal aspects of the GPL (as I understand them) are quite clear in that it is perfectly acceptable for someone to sell code builit around a GPL framework.
  
  The conclusion from this is that as a individual you have the make the decision of wether a commercial module will benefit your site enough for you to pay for it. If not don't or code your own version and release it for free.
  
  As with many other coders around PN I devote my time to coding PN as a hobby nothing more. If I wasn't helping write PN itself my coding skills would be doing nothing. I look at this as the return on my investment.
  
  It may be worth us investigating the addition of another topic to each sub-site for commercial announements.
  
  All I ask is that people respect the authors choice for the chosen method of distribution.
  
  -Mark

  • 
  •  
• larsneo
  
  

  • Rank: Software Foundation
  • Registered: Dec 31, 1969
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 3814

  Posted: Sep 24, 2003 - 09:49 PM

  please check http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
  

  Quote

  Many people believe that the spirit of the GNU project is that you should not charge money for distributing copies of software, or that you should charge as little as possible -- just enough to cover the cost.
  
  Actually we encourage people who redistribute free software to charge as much as they wish or can. If this seems surprising to you, please read on.
  
  The word "free" has two legitimate general meanings; it can refer either to freedom or to price. When we speak of "free software", we're talking about freedom, not price. (Think of "free speech", not "free beer".) Specifically, it means that a user is free to run the program, change the program, and redistribute the program with or without changes.

  
  
  --
  regards from germany
  ..::[Zikula Application Framework]::.. ..::[SEO-Blog]::.. ..::[CMS Sicherheit]::..

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 763

  Posted: Sep 25, 2003 - 06:53 AM

  markwest

  This is a complex issue that there is no simple 'right' answer too.

  
  Actually , there is, Some modules will be free while others will have a fee attached. Simple.
  
  I'm not a programming developer myself, but I am working with one in creating some custom modules for my site (I'm an ideas developer). I am also funding their creation. Part of the reduced cost to me is that the programming developer can charge for them later. While they are being created with my specific needs in mind, they will have commercial applications in many other areas.
  
  A lot of my own time and energy is going into developing these modules. Although I have a list of specifications for each, it involves much more than just paying a programmer to bring them to fruition. It is a joint effort, with me preparing the databases and the programmer adding the programming to activate the functions I envision.
  
  I appreciate free programs also. However, unlike freeloaders who think everything should be free, I understand that some things would not exist without a profit incentive, or an incentive to recover development costs.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Freshman
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 98

  Posted: Sep 25, 2003 - 08:40 AM

  I think larsneo has made an excellent point in linking to the GNU's philosophy on selling; he's linked to it before, very helpfull info!
  I too pay for, and charge for, custom code and design material. As an independant, I work with a small collective of talented people. We all bring in gigs and work as we choose on certain projects. It has worked for me for over 3 years, and I see no need to change it. My point: paying is not evil or wrong, it's a fact of business, and yes there are many viable business models in the Open Source realm.
  
  However, I have two major concerns:
  1) People that charge for their services/products and not donating to the continued expenses of the core that makes it all possible!
  2) People that have open source code in their project and claim that they can restrict distrobution and/or require a special license. Open Source code is viral in nature. Anything that has within it, or needs, a single piece of Open Source code to function, is in fact Open Source. Period.
  
  The former is the one that bothers me most. I truly appreciate all the hard work that has gone into the PN system to date. IMHO, from 5-15% of profits should be directly donated to the core development and it's expenses, consider it a part of development overhead.
  The later is a simple truth. If it's open source you have the choice, the freedom, to choose if you want to distribute it or not.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Freshman
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 98

  Posted: Sep 25, 2003 - 08:45 AM

  I pay for access to code by a developer and do not distribute his hard work. It is my choice, and he knows it. I do not give it away out of respect and in hopes of continued developments.
  IMHO, if you have a great product, and treat clients well, most would do the same.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Sep 25, 2003 - 11:11 AM

  I believe the lot of us agree developers have a definitive right to charge for their efforts.. and PostNuke.com should reserve and maintain the right to benefit from the promotions of the products.
  
  we support commercial mods and themes and believe there is a bountiful future in their services within the PostNuke community. We would like to see them catagorized and appropriately charged for advertising services provided by PostNuke.com.

  • 
  •  
• markwest
  
  

  • Rank: Team Member
  • Registered: Mar 18, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 6606

  Posted: Sep 25, 2003 - 11:36 AM

  Duster

  markwest

  This is a complex issue that there is no simple 'right' answer too.

  
  Actually , there is, Some modules will be free while others will have a fee attached. Simple.
  

  
  
  Agreed - my point being that some people are looking for everything to be free and this is something that is never going to happen. PN is about more than this.
  
  -Mark

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Freshman
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 98

  Posted: Sep 25, 2003 - 02:32 PM

  Mark, someone, pls change the title and let's get more users in here to discuss this important issue.
  Recently Massive posted the (ugly) idea of setting up a system similar to what FB has for PHPNuke. I think that is the wrong way to go...
  

  Quote

  Massive: NO WAY!
  
  The costs should come directly out of the pocket of those that generate revenue from PN and it's invaluable user base. The user's should get the core for free, along with any other donated themes, mods, etc.
  This will allow the userbase to grow and enhance the core, while providing a viable stream of income for the project. Forcing a fee to the general public will only cause a divide in the existing community and add hesitance to potential new users in trying this wonderful CMS...besides, the average user isn't always using PN for profit.
  
  IMHO, anyone that is profiting from any Open Source project should donate directly to that project. Consider it part of your overhead.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Sep 26, 2003 - 09:14 AM

  Massive's objection is due to his/her being impartial to the subject. That person is a theme designer who benefits from the free advertising provided by PostNuke.com.
  
  What some may not realize is the adverse effects of charging for commercial listings. Those unwilling to contribute to PostNuke.com via the "ad packages" would need to draw their comsumer base from free module listings..
  
  Seperation from the "freebies" would also add an "elitest" stature...a handful of qualified developers competing in efficiency and design.. I would be far more inclined to support a commercial product if I knew they had contributed to the PostNuke development team.

  • 
  •  
• markwest
  
  

  • Rank: Team Member
  • Registered: Mar 18, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 6606

  Posted: Sep 26, 2003 - 11:21 AM

  Some developers of commercial software do contribute in significant ways to the project - e.g. Larry Masters (phpnut) whose developed Xanthia (from it's encompass roots) for use in the core product, some don't - the key point is that this is thier choice and they are within thier rights to choose thier own method of distribution of thier work. Many will write commerical software and freely distribute and earlier (or cut down) version e.g. Shawn Mackenzie with AutoTheme and AutoTheme lite.
  
  It shouldn't be for any individual to pass judgement on the work and chosen methodogly of others. As i've said already many themes/modules simply wouldn't exist if not for the authors ability to generate some revenue from the work. Simply it's up to each individual to make a decision over paying for a piece of code. Some will, some won't because they can't, some won't because they object but each individual has the right to choose to do that.
  
  Commercial developments around PN benefit PN as it improves the profile and respectability of the project as a whole. I wouldn't like to see any steps that harm this.
  
  I agree that we need authors to make a clearer statement as to the method of distibution of any work but I want to see pn.com continue to be THE place for the announement of work around the project regardless of the method of distribution.
  
  -Mark
  
  --
  Visit My homepage and Zikula themes.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Sep 26, 2003 - 01:15 PM

  Hi Mark..thanks for your reply.
  
  As far as I knew Xanthia was a free distribution..maybe this has changed since v1. I've also noticed that Shawn will only post updates of ATLite..the free distribtution.
  
  I have no problems with paying for commercial mods and themes..I'm not concerned whether they choose to charge or not. I don't believe I've mentioned any disdain for their choice to be compensated for their efforts. I do believe it's their right and completely acceptable.
  

  Quote

  
  As i've said already many themes/modules simply wouldn't exist if not for the authors ability to generate some revenue from the work.

  
  ..they also would not exist without the PostNuke CMS.
  
  ...as "I've said already":
  

  Quote

  
  we support commercial mods and themes and believe there is a bountiful future in their services within the PostNuke community. We would like to see them catagorized and appropriately charged for advertising services provided by PostNuke.com.

  
  
  My concern was with you, the developers, but if this is something that does not interest you or your group, then please except my apologies for the distractions.

  • 
  •  
• HalbrookTech
  
  

  • Rank: Developer
  • Registered: Dec 31, 1969
  • Last visit: Jun 01, 2010
  • Posts: 6859

  Posted: Sep 26, 2003 - 06:05 PM

  InvalidResponse

  Hi Mark..thanks for your reply.
  
  

  Quote

  
  As i've said already many themes/modules simply wouldn't exist if not for the authors ability to generate some revenue from the work.

  
  ..they also would not exist without the PostNuke CMS.
  

  
  
  It can also be argued that PN wouldn't be as popular with out the modules that are written for it. One of the reasons I haven't moved any sites to Xaraya just yet is because of lack of some key modules that aren't ready yet. With out the modules PN can't thrive with out quality modules, but module developers can write their programs with out PostNuke.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  

  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 124

  Posted: Sep 26, 2003 - 08:07 PM

  InvalidResponse

  Hi Mark..thanks for your reply.
  
  As far as I knew Xanthia was a free distribution..maybe this has changed since v1...

  
  
  Nothing has changed with Xanthia. It is part of the PostNuke .8 core. What Mark was saying I believe is that some developers create things that are released with no charge for PostNuke and those same developers, like myself, will also create things for PostNuke that they will charge for. I opened a site earlier this year to promote GPL software for commercial use.
  
  This is on the main page of my site.
  
  
  

  Quote

  CorpNuke offers GPL subscription services to further advance application development under the GPL for corporate and commercial use. Our subscription services target the continued development of PHPNuke variants for the medium to small business enterprise. CorpNuke's first commercial offering will be SiteSubscribe.
  
  CorpNuke uses a portion of subscription funds to develop non subscription GPL Modules for the general business and non commercial community. One such example is Xanthia, a Themes Rendering Engine that allows commercial sites to manage their Templates and Block Layout similar to proprietary CMS solutions.
  

  
  
  I have not released any modules for a charge yet, been too busy with other things, but I will do so in the future. With hopes that people will pay and then I can "return" something back to the community again.
  
  You can even read my bio on that site that will give you a better understanding on how I feel about developing GPL products.
  or here http://www.larrymasters.com
  
  Larry E. Masters
  aka PhpNut
  Xanthia Theme Engine Developer

  • 
  •  
• markwest
  
  

  • Rank: Team Member
  • Registered: Mar 18, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 6606

  Posted: Sep 26, 2003 - 10:17 PM

  phpnut

  InvalidResponse

  Hi Mark..thanks for your reply.
  
  As far as I knew Xanthia was a free distribution..maybe this has changed since v1...

  
  
  Nothing has changed with Xanthia. It is part of the PostNuke .8 core. What Mark was saying I believe is that some developers create things that are released with no charge for PostNuke and those same developers, like myself, will also create things for PostNuke that they will charge for. I opened a site earlier this year to promote GPL software for commercial use.
  

  
  
  This is exactly the point I was making. Thanks for clearing up any potential mis-interpretation of my point.
  
  -Mark

  • 
  •  
•  
•  

Users on-line

• AllKnightAccess

This list is based on users active over the last 60 minutes.