pragmaMx, a new attempt, to contact the team for a permission.

[spottedhog]

[Unknown], I guess we will need to agree to disagree......

You keep talking about a bridge as if it were a good thing....  Again, I just looked at the Mambo bridge and today it shows 1218 topics and 10,278 posts....  all because of trying to maintain 2 database tables for 2 separate systems.  If there were just the one database table to maintain, all of those topics and posts would immediately disappear.  (and I am all about eliminating support issues)

The value in being able to distribute is in an area that you have not mentioned.  Two of the best features of SMF are in the install.php file and the Package Manager.  When those two areas are slightly modified to accomodate the CMS, then this is a tremendous help for the website admin. 

Let me explain using PHP Nuke as the base.  Sure there are database install files that can create the tables for Nuke, but then one still must manually edit the config.php file.  What I am doing is to remove everything from the config.php file, and place it in the Settings.php file.  Then I add the Nuke tables to the SMF sql file and then the SMF install.php file does it all.  (Yes, a couple of modifications were needed in the install.php file to make it all work best for both applications)

The Package Manager is an excellent tool, and with a couple of small changes and additions, it can be used to modify PHP Nuke files.  No more manually editing any files.

So the value in us distributing is to more easily make available the few file changes necessary to make SMF and the CMS play nice.   The core code integrity is intact and future upgrades will rarely change the code we modified.  (you are aware of this with what we did with PHP Nuke)  The value in us distributing is for the website admin..... so they can download all the files from one location and not have to upload and replace files from 2 locations.  It is all about logistics.....  it is NOT about code or copyright integrity.

I am saddened you lump all intregration efforts into the "sins of the past" groups.  We or anyone else are NOT these past groups you refer to.  I have no idea what they did, but I know at least our intention is to abide by the SMF Licensing Agreement.  And from what I have read and understood, our small changes coupled with the inclusion of the License text file and NO copyright changes are what SMF require to distribute.  welllllll, along with written permission.  We easily meet SMF requirements.  Pretty simple stuff.....

This all may boil down to whether or not SMF wants to allow distribution.  Obviously you are against any distribution.  If all of SMF feels the same, then SMF should remove that distribution part of the License.  Pretty simple really.  But if SMF wants to continue to allow distribution on a case by case basis, then they should analyze requests in a fairly timely manner and at least establish some kind of communication with the requesting party.  That would be mutually beneficial.

Ya know, there are some possible advantages in SMF being distributed with a CMS package.  I can see three distinct advantages in our proposed distribution. 

1. Theme files and langauge files can be downloaded from the central Downloads module of the CMS.

2. More SMF theme files will be created because more theme designers will have another place to use their creations.

3. SMF will be more secure because it will be under the CMS security umbrella, (Sentinel in PHP Nuke for example)

What would be considered bad from the above improvements?  So actually there are even more reasons why distribution can be a good thing.

The overall implication is that those of us who wish to distribute SMF lack in some way or another.  Personally I think there must be a feeling we lack integrity.  Do you really believe that if we are here battling for something we truly believe in, that we would be lacking integrity?  If we lacked integrity, we would just do what we wish and then let SMF "catch us".....  But you are not seeing that here.  We each have been sincere, and we each have been following the rules and guidelines set up by SMF.  In PragmaMx and in SMF-Nuke (ours) we have followed all the rules as is publically printed.  This is truly the issue for us.  It has nothing to do with whether programmically we need to port or bridge.  We have been doing what is asked in what is publically written.  We have been trying to maintain and even improve SMF in its use with other programs.  But we have not received reciprical communications.  This is what we are asking.....  talk to us..... tell us if we have been "good or bad".

bottom line......  Is SMF going to allow distributions or not?  And if so, we ask that we are in the communication line.... that is all we are asking......    but it is the source of our frustrations ..... and our need to vent here......

[Andi]

ok, we will build a bridge

first demo:
http://demo.pragmamx.de/modules.php?name=Forum

RiotheRat, my point is this.  If you were to make it such that you have no need to modify the copyright statement, and have no need to redistribute any part of SMF, you would obviously need no permission from us.

I can call it a bridge, but that's where the difference is: a port is a changed and redistributed version.  A bridge is neither; it is a separate entity which makes the two softwares work together as one.  A bridge requires no redistribution whatsoever.

@ [Unknown] & Team
Here  is the first alpha pre-release:
http://www.pragmamx.org/temp/pragmaMx-SMF-Bridge.zip (55kb)
Please take a look at it and tell me if it's ok as "bridge"

[Yakuza]

I'm not condemning anyone.  I just don't like ports.  Supermod was bad for mod authors.  ttForum was bad for the team.  YaBB.it was bad for the Italians and for us.  I cannot recall a single port that did any good for anyone in the long run.

-[Unknown]

I must agree with you on this, in my intentions yabb.it was a modding and support community, the coiche of a port was not mine, i was already out of yabb's world

[Andi]

Hi

maybe 1000 pragmaMx Users are waiting for this great Forum script.
I will give them an answer.


Please give me 2 quick and easy answers:

Thank you for your efforts, all appears to be in order, and I will forward a letter of permission to you at the end of the week.

can we hope for this letter?
YES or NO

Please take a look at it and tell me if it's ok as "bridge"

Is this new script a 'bridge', where we don't need permissions?
YES or NO

[[Unknown]]

Please take a look at it and tell me if it's ok as "bridge"

Is this new script a 'bridge', where we don't need permissions?
YES or NO

Patience, again, is a virtue.  It looks fine to me, and no you do not need permissions to distribute a modification package ("patch", "package", etc.) of your own design - the license *specifically* allows this.

-[Unknown]

[Andi]

Hi

Patience, again, is a virtue.

You saw, that this patience already persists for April? 

But no matter, it makes me happy very much, that we became now nevertheless still united.
It would be too unfortunate, to withhold this ingenious board all the potential users.

Thx for this great work 
greetings from germany, of me and of all future SMF users


ps. please excuse my bad English

[GravuTrad]

Can we have a hope to see this bridges in the smf downloads?
Pragmamx is cool and the bridge works very well.
Thanks for advance.