Home / Joomla News / Key Questions for the Joomla Project 
Joomla News
Apr
26
2007
Key Questions for the Joomla Project
Written by Steve Burge   
Avatar

For those of you that haven't read it yet, there's a fascinating post over on the Joomla forums, that touches on many crucial questions for the project.

The thread started innocuously when one member posted a "Things I don't like about Joomla" list. In trying to answer them, lead developer Johan Jansseens mentioned that, "Encryption of Joomla! extensions is a violation of the GPL".  This generated more questions than it answered, because many Joomla components are encrypted and thus potentially violating the Joomla! license.

Some of the Key Issues

  • Licensing. What is the most appropriate way for Open Source developers to monetize their work?
  • Encryption. How far should developers be allowed to go in protecting thier work?
  • Commercialism. How much is the community willing to tolerate?
  • Enforcement. What should Joomla's reaction to be to license infringements?
  • Divergent Interests. How can Joomla balance the needs of hobbyists, non-profits, developers, small business, big businesses and others?

Why No Easy Answers?

  • Its a complex issue. Each component would need to be judged on its own merit. The GPL is open to interpretation. Someone would probably need to examine each component to judge whether it infringes.
  • Its a new issue. An Intellectual Property lawyer with subtantial Open Source experience mentions that he has "yet to see any judgments on this issue".
  • Its a community issue. The point Johan uses most in his answers is, "this is open for debate" and "I would love to hear more community feedback".

Over to You

If you're interested in the future of Joomla, you need to read this thread.

 

Read more articles by this author:

Comments  

 
#1 Amy Stephen 2007-04-25 19:15
Quote:
Its a community issue. The point Johan uses most in his answers is, "this is open for debate" and "I would love to hear more community feedback".


That's what I love about Joomla!.

Nice job framing the issue, thanks Steve.
Quote
 
 
#2 Klaus Nitsche 2007-04-26 02:24
If this discussion is continuing in the way I fear, then Joomla is headed nowhere fast. The thread you mentioned is quite alarming to me.

Since the discussion there is mixing the words "encrypted" and "commercial" and treating them equally, let's just look at what role commercial extensions play.

I think we need commercial developers to empower Joomla for non-hobbyist, business use. If someone decides to make a living developing Joomla extensions, then they'd better be good or they're disappearing from the market quickly. Extensions from people who develop and support them full-time add those things to Joomla that are needed in the business world: Reliability and quality.

(Sure, there are extensions which aren't worth their money. But users can find out about them quickly thanks to the review sections on the JED.)

I think the power of open source alone is not enough to qualify Joomla for business use. Just to name two examples, Joomla core development (and Mambo development up to Sept 2005) has been painstakingly sloooooooow and roadmaps have never been adhered to. And OpenSEF development as a major SEF component has come to a screeching halt with nobody taking over. Can you really build a business on that?

I'm all for open source, I have supported Mambo/Joomla heavily in Germany for several years through publicity, informational sites and forum activity, I have donated. I also use commercial extensions where I see a need for them. I think it is a big mistake to scare commercial developers away.

Why should anybody devote huge amounts of time for developing high-class extensions such as Mosets Tree or JomRes (these are "editor's pick" on the JED by the way) without being allowed to charge for them? People need to be able to pay their bills.

Not being a lawyer, I can't say if the GPL really allows commercial extensions ("applications") or not. Well, if it should turn out it doesn't, then my advice for Joomla is: Go LGPL so that 3rd party devs need not fear actions being taken against them some time.

Anything else would probably amount to suicide for Joomla. At the least, it will sink back into irrelevance.
Quote
 
 
#3 Amy Stephen 2007-04-26 07:13
Zorro -

That's a bit fatalistic! And, I seriously think you came away from that discussion with a far different impression than I did.

I think when this is all done, there will be a strengthened commercial market - and not just for little "widgets" but for major vertical market applications and enterprise level solutions.

There wasn't a single person in there against commercial solutions - encrypted extensions used with a GPL'ed application are very likely outside of the framework of the license. That's just the facts. The real question is, what do we want to do about it?

I am leaning towards a dual licensing structure where commercial use of Joomla! can be accomplished and marketed. But, the GPL'ed "community" version can continue without encrypted solutions in a more pure free/open source environment and be more available to others.

The worst thing that could happen, IMO, is that this discussion doesn't take place. That's a decision, too, but one that "happens" to us instead of one that we guide.

Hat's off to the Joomla! core team and OSM for inviting community comment. Get in there, Zorro, and let your voice be known! What license(s) should Joomla! use and why? Encrypted in, or out, and how do you think your answer will impact the future of open source extensions?

Thanks for voicing your opinion here - but - please - get it into the forums, too. Your voice matters!

All the best!
Amy :-)
Quote
 
 
#4 Amy Stephen 2007-04-26 07:19
I see I loosely used "commercial" and "encrypted" in that response. Arg!

The reason those terms are being used interchangeably right now is because we are seeing that happen to Joomla! extensions right now. Developers are increasingly choosing to encrypt their commercial extensions. If people charge for the distribution of their open source solutions, that's allowable within the GPL, provided the source code is open. But, more and more, people are following the practice of others and encrypting that code.

I think human nature - that paranoid piece in each of us - chooses encryption over trusting the community if that choice is allowed and others take it. But, if we enforce the GPL, then open source can work.

For the higher end vertical market solutions - the BIG stuff - perhaps we do need dual licensing.
Quote
 
 
#5 Steve Burge 2007-04-26 07:59
Hi Zorro, Amy
Quote:
The worst thing that could happen, IMO, is that this discussion doesn't take place.


Absolutely! And the best time to have it is right now, before the move to Joomla 1.5. Before the project takes another leap forward in popularity, and before Joomla.org is upgraded to 1.5.

My personal opinion is that companies such as Rockettheme, Phil Taylor, Joomlashack and others have shown that it is possible to have a successful business without encoding.

We've heard a lot from the core team and community members so far, but not much from the developers themselves. Hopefully they'll chime in too...
Quote
 
 
#6 Brian Teeman 2007-04-26 14:42
I think if you speak to Phil you will find the main reason he doesnt encode (he did try it) was because they can all be broken and it just added more support issues
Quote
 
 
#7 Emir Sakic 2007-04-26 16:12
"My personal opinion is that companies such as Rockettheme, Phil Taylor, Joomlashack and others have shown that it is possible to have a successful business without encoding."

Steve, none of those companies are selling their extensions under GPL terms. Using a commercial license or encoding the extension is pretty much the same, none of those options are open source.

The Joomla! copyright holders can choose where to stand in regards to components with non-GPL complient licenses, but there is no way for them to condamn encrypted extensions while supporting other, non-ecripted extensions released (or sold) under no-free license.

So the question is embrace the extensions with commercial licenses (other than GPL) (as it was the case until 12 days ago) or not. The question is not about encoding, it's not possible to forbid.
Quote
 
 
#8 Lawrence Meckan 2007-04-26 20:36
This does bring in some interesting questions for the Google Summer of Code as microformats, whilst not being licenced yet, is going to adopt some form of licence sooner or later. If that licence is BSD based, it won't work in Joomla (as per the usual BSD vs GPL ideological war across the open source world).

Not to mention I'm integrating stuff based on MIT licencing (which is yet another open form of licencing), LGPL (which really isn't that bad, and would be an adequate solution for J! in the long term) and a swag of other "open source" licences in order to make the overall product better.

And then there's the whole mentality which Vimes commented on elsewhere about Joomla! bringing in the "hobby" market thanks to Rockettheme and others 'chopshopping' (as per the Simplebits vs LogoMaid debarcle) in terms of price thanks to a subscription model. This then lessens the professional kudos of Joomla!, no matter how many awards it has won.

So 3 areas are at stake: the value of commercial works vs the hobby market J! has attracted, licencing, and professionalism .
Quote
 
 
#9 Steve Burge 2007-04-27 17:15
Brian - Quote:
I think if you speak to Phil you will find the main reason he doesnt encode (he did try it) was because they can all be broken and it just added more support issues


Another good reason not to encode. We initially encrypted our SEO Book but it provoked so many emails from users who found it troublesome that we removed that protection.

Emir - you're right about that. It seems 99% sure that other licenses will be allowed to continue, but that the Joomla team wanted to kick off a debate about ethics. People like yourself have given to the project in spades. They seem to want to raise the consciousness of those who haven't.

Lawrence - agreed. You seem to be one of those people thinking longer term about where Joomla is headed. Reducing this to nit-picking about the GPL means we can't focus on the larger questions of commercial value, licencing, and professionalism .
Quote
 
 
#10 Amy Stephen 2007-04-27 17:28
This discussion is about any license not compatible with the GPL. That means the extensions have to be readable (not encrypted) and also distributable (not restricted.) If this change is implemented, I certainly hope that it is implemented universally and we don't try to get into measuring someone's value as some type of payment for not meeting the requirements of the GPL.

Personally, I think dual licensing with the funds going to fund a bounty program at least helps motivate developers willing to liberate their code.

The GPL is founded on principles of free knowledge, meaning knowledge, and software, cannot be owned. Business models need to keep that principle in mind.
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh