| Re: Suggestion regarding the module repository |
| by ptomter on 2010/7/30 22:48:51 I think this should apply both to the paid and non paid section of module rep. |
| Suggestion regarding the module repository |
| by ptomter on 2010/7/30 22:48:02 Hi, regarding Xoops and GPL and commercial modules I have a suggestion that we may use the same princip as JED (Joomla Extension Directory) Quote from the wiki regarding modules/extensions- "The Joomla team is strongly committed to supporting both commercial and non-commercial Joomla developers. We have implemented some policy changes to enhance our support for developers. We think that the best place to get an extension is from the original developer of that extension. Therefore we will not link to collections of GPL extensions that are not submitted by the original developer. These are not requirements of the GPL license but rather fall in line with our "forking" guidelines that no direct copies or minor-changed copies of JED-listed projects will be listed. We support the original project developer whenever possible to maintain the integrity of the listings and support developers who are building and innovating on the Joomla platform. To have a forked project listed in the JED it must meet our requirements: •Significant change Forked project must represent a significant code improvement, either in features or security and structure. •Intent to develop and support Forked project must exhibit an intent to develop and support the new product. •Unique name We do not allow forked projects by new developers to build on the name of the original developer without permission. •Unique version structure Version numbering must clearly indicate a new project. This way there wouldnt be 10 different versions of everything, and rules to maintaine the integrety of the module development and not beeing "copycat" with the same modulename. |