News:

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

Main Menu

Joomla & SMF - this is a disaster !

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

Previous topic - Next topic

anna.young

Amy, as just an end user I'm not interested in 'wait & see' approach, nor in politics involved nor in your damage control nor your 'spin cycles'... 

SMF in the past was consistent in their software, philosophy  and their support.  Their earned my loyalty and support. The same cannot  be said about Joomla!. It is unfortunate that I am not be able to upgrade to Joomla1.0.13 at this time. When it's time for me to upgrade, I'll be looking for an CMS that is bridgable simply and elegantly with SMF and not the other way around.  Somehow I doubt that Orstio will be developing some monstrosity just to comply with some silly 'interpretations...' I know I wouldn't... I would rather put my 'hobby' time and effort into another project...

Anna
Toronto German Shepherd Dog Rescue

"Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do." (SJ)

cferd

Quote from: AmyStephen on July 28, 2007, 06:14:24 PM
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.
Exactly. That is why it boggles the mind why the so-called powers that be at Joomla, all of a sudden decided to be the champions of the users and devs. The users really don't need them and devs hardly need or want them protecting their interests.

dawen


cferd

Quote from: Omega X on July 28, 2007, 07:03:20 PM
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.
If you want to see it that way ok, but Orstio is a dev. I don't think he's SMF.

I know he appears close to it  :) but he's yet to corner the market on Bridges. If he has really given up on SMF-Joomla, it doesn't necessarily mean the end of Joomla-SMF, but maybe only this particular Bridge.

Omega X

Quote from: cferd on July 28, 2007, 07:54:34 PM
Quote from: Omega X on July 28, 2007, 07:03:20 PM
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.
If you want to see it that way ok, but Orstio is a dev. I don't think he's SMF.

I know he appears close to it  :) but he's yet to corner the market on Bridges. If he has really given up on SMF-Joomla, it doesn't necessarily mean the end of Joomla-SMF, but maybe only this particular Bridge.

That is only because you read it that way.

None of the things I've said suggested that Orstio was SMF or any other project. 

My answer was simply that since Orstio is not making the bridge for SMF anymore. I did not mention that it was the end of SMF-Joomla for anyone else willing to wait forever for another implementation which would probably be held to the same restrictions that Orstio was.

But it is the end of SMF-Joomla for ME if this issue is not resolved by the time that I have to make a decision.

Is that clear enough?

cferd

Quote from: Omega X on July 28, 2007, 08:13:24 PM
But it is the end of SMF-Joomla for ME if this issue is not resolved by the time that I have to make a decision.

Is that clear enough?
It was clear the first time around and that's what I replied to. From your post, you are looking at Orstio and only Orstio as your savior and that was my point.

青山 素子

Quote from: cferd on July 28, 2007, 07:54:34 PM
If you want to see it that way ok, but Orstio is a dev. I don't think he's SMF.

I know he appears close to it  :) but he's yet to corner the market on Bridges. If he has really given up on SMF-Joomla, it doesn't necessarily mean the end of Joomla-SMF, but maybe only this particular Bridge.

That doesn't mean any third-party bridge will be legal either. That will need to be determined should one pop up.

Anyway, the Joomla! folks are talking to us on some possible workarounds to make a legal bridge that would respect both licenses. I haven't been told any details yet, so I don't know how practical the solutions would be. We'll have to see once more information is gathered. Speculation without any details won't help any.
Motoko-chan
Director, Simple Machines

Note: Unless otherwise stated, my posts are not representative of any official position or opinion of Simple Machines.


antracit

Quote from: antracit on July 28, 2007, 03:53:58 AM
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?

Hi

Sorry for quting, but I'm trying to move forward. Any SMF Guru that have an answer to this?

//johan

Sageth

I'm confused.  Then how can forum.joomla.org use SMF if you're not allowed to bridge the software?  I would imagine that they have the latest version of Joomla on their site.

Omega X

Quote from: cferd on July 28, 2007, 08:23:21 PM
It was clear the first time around and that's what I replied to. From your post, you are looking at Orstio and only Orstio as your savior and that was my point.

No, I am not looking for Orstio to be a "savior" or whatever you choose to call it.

I am looking at my current options to the problem at hand by the time my deadline comes around.


@Sageth

This has nothing to do with Joomla using SMF as a standalone product. Its about the Bridge that lets the two operate together.

Joomla's site is not bridged.

redone

Quote from: Sageth on July 29, 2007, 12:04:54 PM
I'm confused.  Then how can forum.joomla.org use SMF if you're not allowed to bridge the software?  I would imagine that they have the latest version of Joomla on their site.
Again, the difference is between "use" and "distribution". If memory serves me correctly the forum at Joomla is not bridged. Even if it was your misunderstanding the current situation.

You are not distributing the bridge you are simply using it. I hardly see anyone taking you to court for using such a bridge.

;)

p.s For those that have talked about Simplemachines and the license. I strongly doubt that you can expect a change in direction in terms of the that. We have always been clear about and will remain so.


Sageth

I understand what the license meant, but I was not aware that Joomla.org was not bridged.  Thank you for that clarification.

AmyStephen

Quote from: Motoko-chan on July 28, 2007, 11:11:29 PM
Anyway, the Joomla! folks are talking to us on some possible workarounds to make a legal bridge that would respect both licenses. I haven't been told any details yet, so I don't know how practical the solutions would be. We'll have to see once more information is gathered. Speculation without any details won't help any.

Excellent. Thanks, Motoko for sharing this great news. All the best to you as you work together on this. Much thanks!

Amy :)

Toma Grubb

I can across this post quit by accident while looking for solutions in getting the bridge to work and find it very disturbing. I am an old man and not as adapt at making web pages work as I believe so many of you probably are. It has taken me close to to years  to get to a point where I think I can present a quality site. Up grades are probably a very good idea but i would rather concentrate on site content than have to spend most of my time learning how to get things to work together.

If there is going to be a problem with upgrades as it appears there will be in upgrading to joomla 1.0.13 I will probably just stick with what I have and hope no hacker finds and exploits any weakness.

I have been a business man most of my life. There seems to me to be a simple solution to this problem. Neither side has to change a license or anything else. When ever I had to integrate two competing systems for business purposes it was simply a matter of a contract that allowed the two sides to use the features of the other. It is done in business every day. Owners of proprietary systems or processes agree to allow a third party (us, the end users) to use both to achieve the goal of the third party. Neither license is compromised and neither side gives up rights they are other wise entitled to.

If there is any interest in this approach I would be willing to submit a contract for consideration by both sides.

I am too old with too many other irons in the fire to try to learn new systems just to keep my sites functioning.

青山 素子

#74
Quote from: Toma Grubb on July 29, 2007, 09:10:33 PM
If there is going to be a problem with upgrades as it appears there will be in upgrading to joomla 1.0.13 I will probably just stick with what I have and hope no hacker finds and exploits any weakness.

There are actually un-fixed security issues in 1.0.13. The only "security fix" in 1.0.13 I know of was upgrading the password scheme to behave differently, which makes things a lot harder if an attacker should get access to where they are stored. Of course, if they get access to there, they already have enough to cause you problems (they just can't easily reverse the passwords you and your users have).

Quote from: Toma Grubb on July 29, 2007, 09:10:33 PM
I have been a business man most of my life. There seems to me to be a simple solution to this problem. Neither side has to change a license or anything else. When ever I had to integrate two competing systems for business purposes it was simply a matter of a contract that allowed the two sides to use the features of the other. It is done in business every day. Owners of proprietary systems or processes agree to allow a third party (us, the end users) to use both to achieve the goal of the third party. Neither license is compromised and neither side gives up rights they are other wise entitled to.

The problem is this is unlike a business with closed software. They (Joomla! project) are using portions of software code developed by others and don't have permission from those people to change the license from their current terms, which a contract would accomplish. They would need to have all the owners of the code agree to that, and it is either too large of a burden, or they don't have records to ensure they can contact everyone.
Motoko-chan
Director, Simple Machines

Note: Unless otherwise stated, my posts are not representative of any official position or opinion of Simple Machines.


joomla

Quote from: Sageth on July 29, 2007, 12:04:54 PM
I'm confused.  Then how can forum.joomla.org use SMF if you're not allowed to bridge the software?  I would imagine that they have the latest version of Joomla on their site.
SMF on our website is not bridged with Joomla at all.. it is standalone.

Quote
There are actually un-fixed security issues in 1.0.13. The only "security fix" in 1.0.13 I know of was upgrading the password scheme to behave differently, which makes things a lot harder if an attacker should get access to where they are stored. Of course, if they get access to there, they already have enough to cause you problems (they just can't easily reverse the passwords you and your users have).
Please be sure to report these issue so we can address them. Thanks!
Brad Baker
www.joomla.org - Core Team Member, Forum Admin http://forum.joomla.org
www.rochen.com - Managed Dedicated and Reseller Hosting Solutions.
www.joomlatutorials.com & .au - Learn Joomla! the easy way.

Stallyon

Joomla vs. Mambo reminds me of the PHP-Nuke/Postnuke days.
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.

joejackson

I think the Joomla team are skating on very thin ice here.

They seem to be hiding behind so called legal issues regarding licences, but these issues are NOT law because they are untested and unproven in the ONLY place legal issues can be resolved in a democracy - a court of LAW.

Statements that it "costs too much in court" as a justification for accepting a so-called legal opinion are not helpful. If Joomla wish to force a legal policy on anyone they must test the legailty of that action in a court of law or run the enormous risk of themselves being sued.

Disclaimers are no protection when someone forces an unlawful course of action onto another person if that other person decides to settle the issue in a court. This fact has been proven time and time again where unlawful actions have been severely penalised despite disclaimers.

Are the Joomla team so blind they do not realise this?

I wish they would stop whining about this opinion or that opinion and remove their tunnel vision spectacles and provide users with a workable solution to this self-made problem.

If the Joomla team do not wish their software to be used in a bridged fashion with SMF they are acting foolishly and recklessly by giving as their reason and justification an opinion on legality that has not been tested in law.

They are opening the gates to a potentially crushing legal blow.

Common sense must prevail or is there a hidden prize worth risking everything for?

青山 素子

This argument is going in circles now, and I think everyone exhausted all the discussion. I'm locking this topic for the time being.

SMF is working with the Joomla! team on a possible workaround they contacted us about and we will post the results once things are figured out.
Motoko-chan
Director, Simple Machines

Note: Unless otherwise stated, my posts are not representative of any official position or opinion of Simple Machines.


Advertisement: