Recommended
More Related Content
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Featured
Featured (20)
Joomla platform LGPL survey
- 1. The Joomla! Platform LGPL Survey The results
- 2. Overview • Survey started on 14 Dec 2012, 8:30 am GMT+10 • Survey finished on 2 Jan 2013, 6:00 pm GMT +10 • 113 responses
- 3. Demographics
- 14. Feedback on the LGPL
- 15. Other questions
- 23. Other Feedback
Editor's Notes
- Participants were asked for their gender.
- Participants were asked to select the region in which they live.
- Participants were asked to select the age group in which they fell.
- Participants were asked what their role was.
- Participants were asked what their job was.
- Participants were asked if they had signed the Joomla Contributor Agreement.
- Participants were asked, on a scale of 1 to 6, how they felt about the Joomla Platform moving to the LGPL.
- The overall feeling is 64% in favour of the Joomla Platform moving to the LGPL.
- This graph breaks down the approval level according to other metrics. The overall approval level is 64%. For people that have signed the CLA, the approval level is 71%. For people that have added Platform code, the approval level is 81%. For people that have added CMS code, the approval level is 72%. For people that have written a Joomla extension, the approval level is 68%.
- Are there any comments you'd like to make regarding the license of the Joomla Platform? ----- Makes no difference to me. If it makes Joomla Platform more popular then go for it.Joomla is GPL and Joomla Platform must be GPLI feel that moving to LGPL will break down barriers for people considering which open source platform to build their applications with.Is there a large number of people requesting this change??About time, let's do this thing.About time.This can only make Joomla stronger and more viable platform for integrating other products and services.I think it's fine under GPL. Throwing a different license in the mix just will create confusion with all those developers that barely understand the current license. IMO the potential confusion out-weighs any benefit presented so far.Anything that doesn't limit, but could extend the reach of the platform and provide a "safer-haven" in to other commercial markets is a plus in my books.I doubt making source code limited will lead to more support. It will more likely lead to commercial splintersAn LGPL licenses makes it easier for adoption and integration into larger projects without causing concern for developers and providing protection for IP.If you goal is adoption, then opening up the licensing is a must.It is not the Joomla! license (GPL or otherwise) that is the barrier to wider adoption of the Platform code. It is the code churn, and lack of developer documentation that makes it clear why it is an advantage to use it, that are the barriers.Developers have already contributed to the platform under the concept that it was GPL.I know that changing the license if a hard and complicated thing to do. But others have done it too. Actually I would even suggest something like a more liberal license, like MIT / BSD.I really think that Joomla should move on LGPL. It's a very amazing framework and a lot of people would use it for bigger commercial projectes once they have not to share their code.Why do you need my gender and age for this question?It's in total contradiction with the JED. How explain that all JED extensions must be GPL and the rule about all softwares on a website which have an extension on the JED, must be GPL too? I think there is a larger inpact.LGPL is appropriate and puts the Platform in parity with other frameworks such as Symfony and Zend which also make use of a "permissive free license."In so far as the intention is to make the use of the Joomla Platform more available to a wider audience then I concur. The caveat will always be that the Joomla Platform then risks missing out on the new developments that flow from that use.There is no reasoning or arguments disclosed sofar as to why it would be needed. If there is a good reason then share it and make the argument.I don't think changing it will make a single lick of legal difference. The RaspeberryPi ships with linux pre-installed and uses their own variant of Linux which allows usage of the Broadcom GPU for displaying video. This is done via an open source mapper to the Broadcom GPU 'blob' - which is also on the device. The fact that it is all pre-installed and delivered has not magically turned the Broadcom GPU blob into GPL code - and this is well settled legal territory - a ""package"" can contain both GPL licensed and non-GPL licensed code. Thus companies today can already use the platform alongside their own libraries and code. LGPL is more of an ethical statement in that it encourages such use, as opposed to the GPL which discourages such use.My concern is the possibility that devs will only push back code that only benefits/supports their proprietary forks of the framework leaving the platform as a skeleton. Promises to give back will become empty when their $$$ bottom line can be effected. Ive made plenty of money with the cms and see no difference in the platform, profit from what you build from it.. not from it itself...I beleive it will only get better staying with GPL.why change ?I think it's a good move that will open up visibility and options for the Platform as a whole.1) I include this by reference: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-not-lgpl.html The question is ""is the Joomla project about open source or is it about popularity?"" I submit that it has been about open source, and that hasn't hindered our popularity. I strongly oppose deviating from that course. 2) Do we have a legal opinion about mixing GPL and LGPL PHP code? I have a concern that the GPL-only restriction in the CMS can be easily defeated if we proceed with this. I'll just install extensions into the framework directory, right?If it will help the Enterprise adopt usage and or help with getting great adoption from the masses and it does not change the GPL. we are should do it.It's quite better continuos in GPLWho want to use joomla platform for his application should release it GPL. I have little right to comment, the platform does not contain any of my time and effort, none of my code, not an ounce of my sweat, nothing, and I fully respect the right of those who have contributed to make this decision, so, thanks for asking & happy to provide the feedback. If the Question was asked .. Would the licence change strengthen or weaken your bond with the Joomla Project ? I would answer, it may weaken my longer term intentions to help and support the Joomla Project, difficult to see how it could strengthen the bond.With the objective of encouraging more developers to use the Joomla Platform code, I think a move from GPL to LGPL is useful.I am against a move from the GPL to the LGPL to allow the development of non-free applications using the Joomla! Platform. That move is not only against the GNU recommendation ( http://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html ), but even against the ""Mission, Vision and V alues"" of Joomla! itself ( http://opensourcematters.org/policies/104-mission-vision-and-values.html ), and against the r easons to allow only GPL extensions in JED ( http://docs.joomla.org/Exten sions_and_GPL ).You guys made a big deal about going GPL a few years ago, commitment to the GPL, etc. Now you want to make it easier for people to take the code and package it up in commercial licenses. Are you still going to only allow GPL/LGPL on the JED? Big mistake. Using the ordinary GPL for a library gives free software developers an advantage over proprietary developers. When not needed, don't change. Frameworks should offer freedom.
- Participants were asked how many years they had been using Joomla. Two-thirds responded having greater than 5 years experience.
- Participants were asked about their experience level developing with PHP and Joomla.
- Participants were asked if they had developed a CMS extension.
- Participants were asked if they had developed other types of applications on the Joomla Platform. CLI stands for Command Line Interface.
- Participants were asked if they where familiar with using git and Github.com.
- Participants were asked what information sources they monitored.
- Participants were asked how they had contributed to Joomla.
- Is there anything else you'd like to share about your Joomla experience? -----Joomla Platform is just some kind of dream of some that leads to some stupid stuff in the CMS. Please try to put back your feet on ground people use joomla as a cms not as a CLI.I was kind of forced into Joomla to begin with by a business decision from my boss, but I got to say, I am happy that it happened this way. I love working with and helping the platform grow on a daily basis.Our clients are all Local Government or University type entities — the ""new"" development cycle addition of a .3 and the increased LTS life has been wonderful for these types of clients. All the bitching and infighting... not so much... greatful that it's rare these days and getting rarer.I love using the Joomla! CMS... but I can' tell you where the Platform is headed. I can't fathom what the goals or road map are the Platform other than the developers separating themselves from the CMS code. Sorry if that's not the reality... but that is the perception.Documentation for the cms is really cluttered, platform is better but essential how-to's for e.g. JSession, JLanguage (JFactory or not) etc. are missing. joomla-platform should separate more from cms, maybe a developer start point where you have an overview when you need to develop for cms (extensions) or use platform (custom webapp, cli, ..)i <3 joomlaDocumentation needs to improve.My main contribution is through our local Joomla! User Group in helping to support others that are new to Joomla! (like me). I wish to extend my gratitude to the Platform Maintainers for garnering feedback from the Joomla! Community at large, for taking the time to explain the issues and in general for all the hard work! To my mind, this demonstrates leadership and the type of community that I am very proud to be a part of, and compels me to give back to, and support, the community in anyway I can. You guys are awesome. Keep that sh-t up!"I have to say I feel so strongly about this that it would make me reconsider my ongoing involvement with the project. It's sad and deeply disappointing that we're even considering it. For me it says that we've lost our founding principles, that we're corrupted by candy-cane visions of popularity, measuring success by metrics instead of by doing good work.Lets get this LGPL done.A good change may be to use ""Doxygen"" to get better API documentation like we have done in France : http://api.joomla.fr And specificly for the JPlatform, this is our direct link : http://api.joomla.fr/jplatform/classes.html Glad for the opportunity to vent in private about my 15 months or so experience learning Joomla. IMO, Joomla code (particularly MVC) is some of the most obscure, convoluted, disjointed, non explicit code I have ever tried to understand. Easy to learn, it is not. Congratulations to whoever put it (MVC) together, but I think we need to make the code much easier to follow so we can attract more & more developers, not just users. I am actively trying to make my own library of simpler versions of all the MVC classes at present (Just for my own ease of use), and I know there's new MVC on it's way. If I think my own slimmed down code is an improvement I'll put it out there when I'm done Also, of course, thanks to all who have contributed code, especially the people making ongoing significant/huge contributions PS : I answered No to GitHub questions 'cos not enough options to explain where my knowledge is at thereJoomla is going to big, to corporate. We don't need a major version every 2 years. It needs to stay simple, free and easy to use. The multilanguage, for example, has been an error.It is a great platform but the use of GPL will make me and my company to move away from Joomla Glad for the opportunity to vent in private about my 15 months or so experience learning Joomla. IMO, Joomla code (particularly MVC) is some of the most obscure, convoluted, disjointed, non explicit code I have ever tried to understand. Easy to learn, it is not. Congratulations to whoever put it (MVC) together, but I think we need to make the code much easier to follow so we can attract more & more developers, not just users. I am actively trying to make my own library of simpler versions of all the MVC classes at present (Just for my own ease of use), and I know there's new MVC on it's way. If I think my own slimmed down code is an improvement I'll put it out there when I'm done Also, of course, thanks to all who have contributed code, especially the people making ongoing significant/huge contributions PS : I answered No to GitHub questions 'cos not enough options to explain where my knowledge is at thereJoomla is going to big, to corporate. We don't need a major version every 2 years. It needs to stay simple, free and easy to use. The multilanguage, for example, has been an error.It is a great platform but the use of GPL will make me and my company to move away from Joomla