Article Management System Module - Modules - XOOPS News

XOOPS

News

News World of XOOPS Developers Hacks Themes Archive Submit News

Modules: Article Management System Module

Posted by: brashOn 2004/10/17 23:50:00 9379 reads

After 5 months of development, countless man hours and a huge effort by all involved, we are very pleased to release the first public demonstration of our new Article Management System module called AMS. Upon registration at the demo site you will have full administrative access to the AMS module so that you can get in and see first hand just what it can do. Many of the features included in AMS are found in no other article management module currently available for Xoops.

AMS was conceived as an Article Management System to house large article repositories with features, robustness and scalability to match. Below is a list of this modules most notable features;

News 1.2 Code Base
Article Versioning
Banner System
Search by Article ID
Article Link Manager
Layout and blocks
Audience Levels
Article Manager

What are you waiting for, get over to; ams.it-hq.org

The comments are owned by the author. We aren't responsible for their content.

Re: Article Managment System Module

skara Published 10/18/2004 8:22 Friend of XOOPS Joined 09/24/2004 Comments 84

it sounds great!
is there any download link?
cause i dont see any

Re: Article Managment System Module

yerac Published 10/18/2004 8:44 Just popping in Joined 09/22/2003 Comments 8

I think that just a demo

Re: Article Managment System Module

brash Published 10/18/2004 8:56 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Hi skara,

Sorry for the confusion, but at this stage there is no publicly available download of this module. Everything is explained on the http://ams.it-hq.org site, but the general purpose of this site is to provide a hands on demonstration to the XOOPS public of the functionality contained in this module. Hopefully this exposure will generate enough interest and ultimately donations to help cover at least a portion of the development costs that to date myself and one other have paid for out of our own pocket. I must be clear in saying we are NOT looking to make money from this module, in fact we aren't even expecting to break even (although we'd very much like to ). However, we feel it only fair that all those who would like to use the module help contribute to its development costs.

Re: Article Managment System Module

skara Published 10/18/2004 10:25 Friend of XOOPS Joined 09/24/2004 Comments 84

Hi brash,
sorry for misunderstanding!
In demo i didnt saw any article with photos inside Are images supported?

i'm willing to pay for a very good Article Management System if it covers my needs.
[i'm publishing a computer magazine in Greece]

Re: Article Managment System Module

malexandria Published 10/18/2004 10:54 Quite a regular Joined 12/23/2001 Comments 281

Very cool, I would be willing to pay $20 for a good article system as well. But how do I access the admin area? You didn't include the password for the demo. Are the top posters numbers part of the articles mod as well?

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/18/2004 12:43 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Most Productive Authors
Most Read Authors (either total or average per article)
Highest Rated Authors (either total or average per article)

are all part of the module

Re: Article Managment System Module

Alan-A Published 10/18/2004 14:17 Not too shy to talk Joined 02/17/2004 Comments 191

Hallo,
the module seems very interesting.

Brash -
Quote:

portion of the development costs that to date

did you pay someone to help with the programming?

Best wishes,

Alan

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/18/2004 14:25 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Yes, Brash paid me to add these features to News 1.2 - turning it into a new module in the process.

Re: Article Management System Module

Alan-A Published 10/18/2004 15:10 Not too shy to talk Joined 02/17/2004 Comments 191

Ah, now I understand.
I'll certainly have a good look at when I've a bit more time.
Alan

Re: Article Management System Module

thernes Published 10/18/2004 19:04 Just popping in Joined 08/27/2004 Comments 11

so this will be released when the donations have piled up :) or?

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/18/2004 19:08 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

At least to the donators, I believe

Re: Article Managment System Module

amayer Published 10/18/2004 19:38 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/18/2003 Comments 82

Quote:

Hopefully this exposure will generate enough interest and ultimately donations to help cover at least a portion of the development costs that to date myself and one other have paid for out of our own pocket.

So how much were the development costs you are trying to cover?

Quote:

This module I feel really does set a new benchmark for XOOPS article management systems in terms of features and permformance

Can you explain further as the demo admin system doesn't work for editing articles, so it's hard to see what these ground breaking features are.

Also, why don't you share the source code with the WF-Section team who have already made their code freely avaiable without any payment? Surely it would be better for everybody if the two teams worked together?

Andy

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/18/2004 20:01 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

I was asked to implement these additional features in the News module because although WF-Sections is better geared towards an article database (content-focus) instead of presenting news (time-focus) WF-Sections were with too many unneeded features.

In order to make me give up my spare time to do programming for others, I need monetary compensation - which Brash and his partner has paid out of their own pockets.

Sharing the source code could be a nice gesture - but how would you like to just give away things, you have paid good money for? Does that seem fair to you?

The WF team works on a voluntary basis, when they have the time for it.
I do (quite) some work on a voluntary basis, but not everything is for free.
Live with it.

However, I do hope that the demo site problems get sorted out so you can get a better view of the improvements.

Re: Article Managment System Module

brash Published 10/18/2004 23:54 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Hi Everyone,

This is a bit embarassing, but it seems we have a little bit of an problem with some of the XOOPS website, and AMS module files that seem to have been corrupted when I was uploading them, which may have in turn corupted our data base . There is possibly also an issue with the php environment on the server where the site is hosted, but more on that later. Unfortunately most of this has gone on overnight (where I am) so has gone unchecked a little longer than I would liked (not that I like any of it). Anyway we are now working at seeing what we can do to rectify the problem, and hopefully the site should be restored in the next hour or two. If you are REALLY keen to see this module in action you can have a look at my site at http://www.it-hq.org which is now live with this module. You will however not have full administrative permissions on this site, but will be able to submit.

Thanks,

Brash

Re: Article Managment System Module

Published 10/19/2004 0:10 Joined Comments

I would like to say that it was a pity that you didn't contact us regarding this matter brash, maybe we could have worked together on this project. Congrats anyway =)

@Mith:
With my conversions with Catwolf, I believe that everything that hass been added to WF-Section was aked by people in the XOOPS community. So not everyone will use everything but there is more to choose from.

Quote:

Sharing the source code could be a nice gesture - but how would you like to just give away things, you have paid good money for? Does that seem fair to you?

Seems one rule for one person and another here, isn't this open source? So in reality once its released its in the public domain :-p Anyway, we over at WF have our own idea's and will be implementing them in the future.

Quote:

The WF team works on a voluntary basis

I think this is the rule for more or less every developer who works with this CMS or any other for that matter.

Quote:

The WF team works on a voluntary basis, when they have the time for it.

Actually this could not be futher from the truth. The WF-Team have been working really hard over the last 3 - 4 months working on our projects and there will be some surprises in store for many people when we release some of our modules.

But then again, no one will have to pay for to see that.

Scott

Re: Article Managment System Module

jmass Published 10/19/2004 3:36 Updated 10/19/2004 3:55 Friend of XOOPS Joined 12/18/2003 Comments 524

Quote:

Seems one rule for one person and another here, isn't this open source? So in reality once its released its in the public domain :-p

This point has been covered many times by myself and others. I have no desire for a flame war, so I will say my peace (and the GPL facts )and leave it alone.

From http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLModuleLicense

Quote:

If I add a module to a GPL-covered program, do I have to use the GPL as the license for my module?
The GPL says that the whole combined program has to be released under the GPL. So your module has to be available for use under the GPL.

But you can give additional permission for the use of your code. You can, if you wish, release your program under a license which is more lax than the GPL but compatible with the GPL. The license list page gives a partial list of GPL-compatible licenses.

So as Scott mentioned above: anyone who receives the module, even if you charged for it (which is your right) can freely distribute it.

I keep bringing this point up because every time I do, people seemed outraged and confused. People using and contributing to GPL software need to understand their rights and the ramifications of these rights. Richard Stallman must be rolling over in his... wait ... he's not dead.

That is all I have to say on this in this thread. I am not planning on getting a hold of this code and releasing it at no charge. I just think peolple should be aware that anyone could and be perfectly within his or her rights.

JMass

PS - If Mith worked on it, I know it is good stuff!

Re: Article Managment System Module

brash Published 10/19/2004 3:54 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Hi Everyone,

I've moved the AMS demo site to my own server as we were hitting dead ends with the server where it was hosted. So the AMS demo site is up and running again, and most importantly working ;-P . Once you register you should all be able to submit and edit articles, as well as everything that comes with having full admin access to the module . Now to trying to address a few of the questions/issues raised.

@skara

Yep, this is an articles module so you'll be able to publish articles with photos in them. AMS has a very similar article construction interface to the News module, so if you can use that, you can use this. We had planned to implement a browser independent WYSIWYG editor, but had to shelve that idea for this release. I dare say this will be implmented in the futire though.

@malexandria

You should have full admin access to the AMS module as soon as you complete your registration. The issues you had eariler were more likely due to the server issues we were having. As I said above, the site is now on my server, and is fully working. Network routing won't be as direct, and available bandwidth won't be as readily available for some international users, but it should still be very usable. Let me know how it performs for you.

@Alan-A

Yes, as Mith said, myself and Jeff who I run the http://www.iis-resources.com site with paid Mith to develop this module into an article management system as this was something we badly needed at that site.

@thernes

You raise a good point here that I don't think I have actually covered properly in the information I have included on the demo site. I'll have to rectify that as soon as I can. Mith has done an outstanding job, and has really poured a great deal of his skill into this. However, Mith obviously cannot GIVE his time for development work of custom modules, and as you might imagine it became quite an expensive exercise over 5 months.At the moment we are looking to recover less than one third of the total development costs through donations from the XOOPS community, which I think is more than fair. Assuming enough money is raised those who donate WILL get the module prior to general release. An exact timeframe is still to be determined as we still have no idea of what to expect from the donations.

@amayer

De ja vu . Anyway, as I said above, we are currently looking to recover a bit less than a third of our total development costs. The demo site should be going again now. Sorry for that inconvienience.

Sharing the source code sort of defeats the purpose of trying to recover some of our costs. As soon as this module hits the general public we pretty much loose any hope of people helping out with these cost by donating. It's unfortunate, but it is pure and simple nature of the beast that most people will not pay for something unless they have too. Yes WF-Section is free, but to date the developers there have given their time voluntarily. The AMS module was a project developed by Mith to the specific requirements that Jeff and myself wanted for our site. And being a custom module, there was also a financial cost incurred. I really want to see this module released to the public, but unless those of the XOOPS community who would like to use it help contribute to its development costs, it isn't going to happen. WF-Section is a very good module in its own right, but it is still quite a bit different in what it offers, and also in how it offers it.

@wfsection

I'll be very interested to see what you guys do with WF-Section module, I'll always have a soft spot for it . However, you have to keep in mind it was May when Catzwolf made his sudden departure and WF-Section was left orphaned. This
is when I commissioned Mith to start developing this module. I had considered continuing the WF-Section project, but there were several reasons why I didn't end up going down that path. By the time WF-Projects.com appeared and adopted the WF projects, development on AMS had already been going for almost a full month.

I do like WF-Section, but I found it to be a hugely complex module to fully master. There is no doubt that the wider community has been kept in mind here as you don't achieve a module of this complexity without taking a lot of opinions/wants into account. I feel that anyone new to XOOPS would find WF-Section V2 hugely confusing, and possibly almost to the point of them looking elsewhere, and I think this is why quite afew people opt for the simplicity of the Articles module.

While I appreciate your sentiment that most other developers give their time freely, you are missing one fundemental point here. AMS is a custom module, and Jeff and I paid quite a large sum of money to have it developed. I think it is perfectly legitimate for Mith to ask for monetry payment for the considerable amount of time he has spent on this. I also think it is perfectly fair and reasonable for Jeff and myself to ask that those who would like to use this module help contribute to the financial cost that to date has been entirely ours. We are not asking to be compensated for the hundreds of hours we have put in personally, we are only asking that around one third of the financial cost from hiring Mith be met prior to us releasing this module. Open Source does NOT equal free. Somewhere, somehow, somebody is meating the costs of development of all Opens Source projects, be it in donating their time and skills, or paying for someone to develop their project.

In the end it is about the community, not the developer. I have been around the XOOPS community for quite awhile now, and like many others have donated a great deal of time in helping others where I can. I think that this module, if released will add a very valuable choice to the article management genre for Xoops. A genere where there are currently suprising few choices that are ready to use in a production environment.

And in conclusion I promise I will not wait until half a dozen people have posted questions before answering as it taks too damn long to type up a big reply like this

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/19/2004 5:40 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Adding to Brash's excellent clarifications, I'd like to respond to Scott's concerns:

Quote:

Seems one rule for one person and another here, isn't this open source? So in reality once its released its in the public domain :-p

You are missing the fact that this module is NOT released. I have made it. I have sent it to my customer and what they do with it is entirely up to them. I could naturally release it myself, since I am the developer and it is GPL licensed... but what would that signal? That I am a scheming b*stard, taking money to do a job and then going behind the back of the customer? I don't think that would look good on my resumé.

Quote:

Quote:

The WF team works on a voluntary basis

I think this is the rule for more or less every developer who works with this CMS or any other for that matter.

You did not miss the fact that I did not work on this on a voluntary basis, did you? I gave up quite a bit of spare time to work on this module, which I personally have little use for. I charge money for that - OS or not OS.

Quote:

Quote:
The WF team works on a voluntary basis, when they have the time for it.

Actually this could not be futher from the truth. The WF-Team have been working really hard over the last 3 - 4 months working on our projects and there will be some surprises in store for many people when we release some of our modules.

And I am anxiously looking forward to what you come up with, but saying that you do not work on a voluntary basis when you have the time for it... isn't that a little wrong? I mean - do you get paid? If not, then it's voluntary. Do you work on it, when you do NOT have the time for it? That would be impressive. The fact that you HAVE had time over the last 3-4 months and that you HAVE some surprises in store is besides the point.

Fact 1: Brash and his partner paid me $500 for this module (which, considering my workload is a VERY low price) with features THEY needed and could see the point in having
Fact 2: Brash and his partner would like to recover just 1/3 of that - with $20 a pop, we are talking less than 10 people.
Fact 3: People tend to think that developer resources are infinite and that they should get everything without paying anything

I am truly sorry that I cannot work 24/7 on XOOPS-related things for free, but you see (everyone of you, not anyone in particular) I have this thing called an apartment that costs money. I also have these physical needs such as food. That costs money too.

If you like what you see and would like this module, then cough up a modest amount to Brash and you will get it - if not, then wait for WF-Sections. I don't see what is unfair about this.

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/19/2004 5:44 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Oh just a little thing more: I have been paid. I won't see a cent of the donations, so it is not ME, who is asking for money for this. Of course I would like to see the module used, but I can see Brash's point very clearly and support that.

Re: Article Managment System Module

Alan-A Published 10/19/2004 11:04 Updated 10/19/2004 11:07 Not too shy to talk Joined 02/17/2004 Comments 191

Hi, once more.
This thread has touched on a old and quite well known nerve.
I think I understand Brash's point of view - he wanted a module, wanted it quick and wanted it goood. So he hired a programmer. Ok.
I also assume that he wanted this module for a client. I'm also assuming that Brash developed this module at his own cost and was not paid for this by his client.

If I understand the GPL License correctly, then Brash has no obligation to make his module freely available - he could keep it for his own (or his client's) use and (hopefully) get at least a bit of his money back in charging for his services in installing the web site as a whole.

What I'm not clear on is whether there is any obligation under the GPL license to make any privately developed work - in this case a module - freely available. I think there is no obligation to do this.

And now Brash is saying, I've financed this out of my own pocket; its good; you can try it out; if you like it, would you help me to cover part of my costs; I couldn't wait for a "community" solution. This is ok. But what I'm hearing as well is a "If you don't make enough donations, then I'm not going to release the module." -or is this my everyday paranoia coming out again?

Perhaps another way would have been at the start to launch an appeal along the lines of - I need this module; its specification is not open to discussion at the moment; it should help to bring XOOPS a good spring forward; I need this module quickly for a client who however won't be paying me for the module itself; can you, the community help me to finance it in advance - a well known programmer will write it for us, and his work will cost so much.

On the other hand, who will donate for an unfinished module?

I think Brash's way was ok, but I think that an appeal in advance would have been better.

Perhaps we can start a "Guidelines for Financing" section in the wiki.

Alan

Re: Article Managment System Module

malexandria Published 10/19/2004 11:12 Quite a regular Joined 12/23/2001 Comments 281

Does the news 2.2 actually work in this module now? If so, can you release the fix? Meaning basically I tried installing the final news 2.2 last week, and couldn't get it to display on my index page. It displayed perfectly fine on my categorie pages, but not on my home page. So I'm hoping you fixed that problem with the articles system, and if so can you release that?

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/19/2004 11:25 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

Brash is saying, I've financed this out of my own pocket; its good; you can try it out; if you like it, would you help me to cover part of my costs; I couldn't wait for a "community" solution. This is ok. But what I'm hearing as well is a "If you don't make enough donations, then I'm not going to release the module." -or is this my everyday paranoia coming out again?

It's your everyday paranoia

Brash IS saying that unless he (and his partner - there is no client here apart from those two) get a little back, the costs (monetary and humanitary) of releasing the module will be too high. Anyone, who has released a module will know that releasing it is only the first part of your problems being over with - there are more to come once people actually use it.

Those, who donate, will also see a benefit in that they will receive the module before it is publicly released by Brash - otherwise, what would be the point of donating if you don't get any benefits?

Quote:

Perhaps another way would have been at the start to launch an appeal along the lines of - I need this module; its specification is not open to discussion at the moment; it should help to bring XOOPS a good spring forward; can you, the community, help me to finance it in advance - a well known programmer will write it for us, and his work will cost so much.

This was actually done (without the costs, though). Not really getting more than a few sporadic "sounds nice... perhaps I'm in". Apparently people will not donate to an unfinished module... and donating to get a finished module is also wrong...All Brash has done is reverting the donation up-front to a back-pay

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/19/2004 11:27 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

Does the news 2.2 actually work in this module now?

What is News 2.2?

If you are talking about the problem in News 1.2 with the front page not showing articles, it was always due to the news_index.html template not updating or the user using a custom template set.

Re: Article Managment System Module

Published 10/19/2004 11:30 Updated 10/19/2004 11:35 Joined Comments

Mithrandir wtf is your problem? Why the hell have you just become so defensive over this issue? For a start, I did not know that you where the developer of this module and to be quite honest, I could not give a toss.

My point in question is one that has surfaced many times, why pay for a module when once it is HAS been RELEASED its then under the current license, then considered OPEN SOURCE. I could pay my £20 and then release it and there would be nothing that Brash or you could do.

My point in question is not the fact that a developer has the right to charge, but the fact that it seems that one person gets ridiculed for suggesting this and nothing is said when another does it. (Now I understand why).

For a start I do have a full time job developing and I still find to work on the WF-Project modules free of charge. Why? I do it because I believe in the right to charge or not to charge for my work.

Oh, please spare me the poor developer act; I am a bit too long in the tooth for that one.

Re: Article Managment System Module

Alan-A Published 10/19/2004 12:06 Not too shy to talk Joined 02/17/2004 Comments 191

Hi,

@Mith.
Quote:

it is only the first part of your problems being over with - there are more to come once people actually use it

Yes, your'e right - releasing something brings obligations with it.
Quote:

Apparently people will not donate to an unfinished module...

And therefore we can only try to get customers to pay development costs...?
Seems like there is no perfect way here.
Alan

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/19/2004 13:01 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

Mithrandir wtf is your problem? Why the hell have you just become so defensive over this issue?

Apart from in the very beginning, where I thought that GPL meant free of charge, I have always meant that one should recognise the work gone into the development of e.g. custom modules - and that the best recognition sometimes is hard cash.

Quote:

why pay for a module when once it is HAS been RELEASED its then under the current license, then considered OPEN SOURCE

To support further development and/or support - or just to show that you are happy that someone did pay to get this developed

Quote:

My point in question is not the fact that a developer has the right to charge, but the fact that it seems that one person gets ridiculed for suggesting this and nothing is said when another does it. (Now I understand why)

I have said earlier that I basically believe that modules should be free. I stand by that, but in this case there was first a callout to anyone willing to donate to the development of this module - not a great response. Brash then forked out his own, private, money to get it done and the feedback has been that it is a good looking module. Reverting the donation to be back-paid instead of paid up front seems to be the only way of covering some of the costs.

I have objected to the people charging $100 for a module - sometimes even conflicting with the GPL as they impose copyright on the module - mainly because I think $100 is a high price. $10-$20 is a manageable price/donation/charge for a module that is getting the kind of feedback, this one has received.

I don't believe that I have ridiculed others for charging for their modules or work.

Quote:

For a start I do have a full time job developing and I still find to work on the WF-Project modules free of charge. Why? I do it because I believe in the right to charge or not to charge for my work.

I have a full time study besides doing core development, heading the module development team, going through modules developed and suggesting optimisations (I even did that for your modules - because I do recognise the work your team is doing and want it to be an efficient module and not just a module with a lot of features). For that I am not getting paid. I have released several modules free of charge. I do it because I believe in giving something back to the community.

However, it does not mean that I cannot see the point of Brash, who would like to recover just a bit of my fee - perhaps enough to be able to hire me to implement further enhancements in the future.

Re: Article Management System Module

phppp Published 10/19/2004 14:10 XOOPS Contributor Joined 01/25/2004 Comments 2857

Well, it is glad to see a new, promising Article Mangement System Module coming out.
Now xoopers have AMS, ARMS, SECTION, SMARTSECTION, SOAP, WFSECTION (In alphabetical order not in quality order).
Who said XOOPS short of quality article management modules? Look this!

In my opinion, at this stage, it would be much better to put the topic in a category of XOOPSLANCE instead of Xoops:News:Module.

BTW: I am serious, some people suggest a xoopslance, shall we start?

Re: Article Management System Module

phppp Published 10/19/2004 14:14 XOOPS Contributor Joined 01/25/2004 Comments 2857

well, it is even more glad that a new DMS(Document Management System) also joined XOOPS short while ago.

Re: Article Managment System Module

malexandria Published 10/19/2004 16:58 Updated 10/19/2004 16:59 Quite a regular Joined 12/23/2001 Comments 281

I meant News 1.2 and I tried all of those solutions, inluding deleting and reinitializing the templates and nothing worked. And if you know that is where the problem lies, there should be a fix that will allow it to work with all the current news template files. It works perfectly fine with the category template files. Why would it be such a big deal to include and release a fix for the news_index.html file? Especially since you'll be charging for this? Which again, I have no problem paying for.

Re: Article Managment System Module

Draven Published 10/19/2004 17:55 Module Developer Joined 05/28/2003 Comments 337

Hope I can clear a few things up here, first off you guys all need to read the GPL license agreement.

I make my living off Xoops, it IS my job and therefore I've read all the docs thoroughly. I'd like to highlight a few things for everyone to help clearup some issues.

Quote:

Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public?

The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization.
But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL.

Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you.

This would also apply to modules developed (and not modified) for a GPL system as was covered in someone’s post above.
Quote:

If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give me a copy?

No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute copies of the program if he chooses to do so. He also has the right not to redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses.

So this pretty much covers the issue of paying someone to develop a module for you and NOT releasing it to the public.

Now, here is where the charging money for release comes in.

Quote:

Does the GPL allow me to sell copies of the program for money?
Yes, the GPL allows everyone to do this. The right to sell copies is part of the definition of free software. Except in one special situation, there is no limit on what price you can charge. (The one exception is the required written offer to provide source code that must accompany binary-only release.)

Does the GPL allow me to charge a fee for downloading the program from my site?
Yes. You can charge any fee you wish for distributing a copy of the program. If you distribute binaries by download, you must provide "equivalent access" to download the source--therefore, the fee to download source may not be greater than the fee to download the binary.

Does the GPL allow me to require that anyone who receives the software must pay me a fee and/or notify me?
No. In fact, a requirement like that would make the program non-free. If people have to pay when they get a copy of a program, or if they have to notify anyone in particular, then the program is not free. See the definition of free software.
The GPL is a free software license, and therefore it permits people to use and even redistribute the software without being required to pay anyone a fee for doing so.

If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?
No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.

All of this can be found at http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

So a quick recap:

- you can charge for development

- you do not have to release the code if you so choose. The developer, or person who commissioned it can keep the code for private use. However, Mith could release the code for free if chosed to, however a professional courtesy would be to respect the person who paid for it.

- You CAN release the code for a charge, but the buyer [user] is free to do what they wish with it and could redistribute it, if they chose to, for free.

Re: Article Managment System Module

charpres Published 10/19/2004 18:39 Updated 10/19/2004 18:47 Not too shy to talk Joined 09/04/2003 Comments 168

Just my 2 cents on a couple of points:

I have no problem with someone charging for something I want. However, I would much prefer paying a set price for a product that I can download and use right now.

I have looked at AMS and it seems nice, but for my own particular applications WF-Sections (version 2.06 or 2.07 beta1) is a better choice. It is an extraordinary module that fits exactly with what I need and the way I work and think, but perhaps overkill for someone who needs something more like AMS. Everyone can judge for themselves, but it is hard to really evaluate something from a demo.

Re: Article Management System Module

Shine Published 10/19/2004 20:50 Just can't stay away Joined 07/22/2002 Comments 822

@ phppp

SMARTSECTION????
I've looked within de module repository but didn't find it! What the heck is smartsection and where can I download this article module?

Grtz., Shine

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/19/2004 20:56 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

SmartSection is in development on http://www.smartfactory.ca

Re: Article Management System Module

brash Published 10/19/2004 23:41 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

So has anyone actually looked, or even better tried using the AMS module on the demo site? I really urge you to give it a try as I trully believe as unbiased as I can be that this module really is a great choice for those wanting a really solid (performance AND feature set wise) article management system for their XOOPS based site that is ready to go in a full production environment NOW!

Hi charpres, and thankyou for actually commenting on the module. I respect your choice, and there is no doubt that WF-Section is a feature rich module. It is however not so friendly on server resources, and it is this performance and scalability angle that we have targeted AMS. I'm a little confused as to your comment that this module can't trully be judged by a demo though. Registered users have full admistrative access to the module making it about 99% accurate (no access to blocks or templates) to what it would be like installed on your own XOOPS environment anyway.

I must say I'm a little dissapointed in the way the rest of the discussion has progressed, but I'll try and address what I think are some major points anyway;

Quote:

wfsection wrote:

My point in question is one that has surfaced many times, why pay for a module when once it is HAS been RELEASED its then under the current license, then considered OPEN SOURCE. I could pay my £20 and then release it and there would be nothing that Brash or you could do.

You're completely correct here Wfsection, in the hands of the public this module is governed by the GPL and anyone and everyone would be free to do what they wish with the code. However, you ARE forgetting/overlooking one fundemental point which Mith touched on. You seem to assume that this module will be released regardless, which I can tell you is not going to happen unless our VERY modest donation target is meet. Developing and then not releasing a module is also something allowed via the GPL, as is charging a fee for the module which Draven and others have pointed out several times. This entire ideal that it should all be free is outdated and entirely unsustainable for those (a) wanting to make a living out of developing/supporting Xoops, and (b) for people wanting to release custom modules they have paid for to the XOOPS community for a fee. It is this mentality that is limiting real innovation, quality and ultimately choice for the XOOPS public.

And in finishing;

- I did appeal to the XOOPS community first to help pay for the development of this module back here in August with only a few responses.

- malexandria, the AMS module is BASED on the news 1.2 code, but is a completely different module. You'll still be able to get the News module free of charge. Sorry if there was any confusion there.

Re: Article Management System Module

phppp Published 10/20/2004 0:40 XOOPS Contributor Joined 01/25/2004 Comments 2857

First of all, I hope I could get time to accept a paid module/project so that I have money to donate so that I can access the code.

Secondly, before your AMS being available for regular xoopsers, why it come with xoops::news::modules?
Isn't xoops::news::modules for xoopser accessible modules?
The "IT Headquarters Re-Launch" coming with XOOPS news is normal to me because it is in the YetAnotherXoopsSite category. I am just curious with how XOOPS news is arranged/categorized.

Re: Article Management System Module

brash Published 10/20/2004 5:13 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

I hope you can too phpp . Seriously though, every little bit counts.

To be honest I didn't give it that much thought when submitting my news item. I had news about a new module, and there was a section called modules. Seemed like a perfect fit at the time. Never heard of the modules section been exclusive to freely available modules before, so can't comment there.

Re: Article Management System Module

Chappy Published 10/20/2004 6:07 Friend of XOOPS Joined 12/14/2002 Comments 456

Brash, I registered and tried to gain access to the module using the demo link near the top, but got a blank page. I then tried to read the articles, but got a You don't have permission to view this page error. I look forward to seeing what you have done.

I use wf-section on some of the sites I run, and the XOOPS section module on others, depending on the saavy of the client.

My two cents about the rest of this:

We all have our own thresholds about what we feel we can donate/give in terms of time. If I spent $500 on one of my projects my wife would insist that I try to get some of it back, even as giving as she is. I don't mind giving time. But, money is another matter, especially in amounts like $500 (not implying at all that the charge is excessive - it isn't). I'm not sure that it can just be expected that they give up this code without the chance to defray some of their expenses.

In this circumstance, I think it benefits all to respect the threshold for giving that each developer has, and to be very thankful for those who are able to give freely of their time and/or money.

I do fear that projects of excellence, like xoops, will become commercialized (anyone looked at Hotscripts lately?). I see no evidence that that is the case here. Aspects of this module apparently required a body of knowledge that the developers needed to pay for and they want to recoup some of their expenses. It is not as though they are charging for the module, as much as trying to recoup a little of what they invested. For my sensibilities, that's fair. The module will be free. If it's any good, and fits my needs, I will donate. Like many others, however, I would loathe the spectre of commericialism in xoops.

Re: Article Management System Module

incama Published 10/20/2004 6:55 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/24/2003 Comments 513

With alot of mixed feelings I've read the article and comments, and to be honest, it makes me a little sad.
Here's a little overview of things that are going through my mind.

Client A asks Developer B to create a module and then tries to charge Community C for the developers costs. What is wrong with this picture?

Mithrandir doesn't has to do anything in this discussion, he's just the developer who has made the module for his client. The client (brash) however has a double role in this. On one site he has the right to ask money for this module, sure, why not try to gain some extra money, but Xoops.org is not the place where he should sell it. We as community have to make sure that XOOPS remains pure, far away from ,in any form what so ever, commercial business.

We all invest in Xoops, in one way or another.

Incama

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/20/2004 8:21 Updated 10/20/2004 8:53 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

Brash, I registered and tried to gain access to the module using the demo link near the top, but got a blank page. I then tried to read the articles, but got a You don't have permission to view this page error. I look forward to seeing what you have done.

I did so, too, a minute ago and I agree that it is a little troublesome. The "AMS Demo" link in the TOP navigation points to modules/news and not modules/AMS so that's a little problem in the theme. (edit: this is fixed now, though)

However, the AMS Demo link in the left main menu does work.
I did not have any problems with viewing articles when logged in, e.g. the First Test Article

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/20/2004 8:40 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

Mithrandir doesn't has to do anything in this discussion, he's just the developer who has made the module for his client.

Correct, I do this as a service to my client - and on the theoretical level in order to make a point for the future that if more people were willing to spend $10-$20 up front on something a little uncertain, we could have more quality modules. I am not suggesting that we divide the downloads section here into price ranges for modules.
Quote:

The client (brash) however has a double role in this. On one side he has the right to ask money for this module, sure, why not try to gain some extra money

What are those "extra" money? Even if 10 people donated $25 each, he would still be $250 short.
Quote:

Xoops.org is not the place where he should sell it. We as community have to make sure that XOOPS remains pure, far away from ,in any form what so ever, commercial business.

I assume that you will be removing the link to core74 hosting in your signature? (not meant to be hostile - but why is that different?)

Why should XOOPS be far away from any commercial business? Quite a lot of people use XOOPS as a tool in their commercial dayjob. I would much rather see a community with more people working free AND for a fee, releasing things to make XOOPS a better system - than XOOPS being a "toy" one works with for the fun of it.

Re: Article Management System Module

Chappy Published 10/20/2004 8:59 Friend of XOOPS Joined 12/14/2002 Comments 456

Thanks, Mith. I got in. Pretty impressive! My small donation will be coming in later this week...

Re: Article Management System Module

incama Published 10/20/2004 9:42 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/24/2003 Comments 513

A lot of 'ifs and buts'.
Quote:

and on the theoretical level in order to make a point for the future that if more people were willing to spend $10-$20 up front on something a little uncertain

People will not pay "ahead" for something they even don't really know what it is, trust me.
Quote:

What are those "extra" money? Even if 10 people donated $25 each, he would still be $250 short.

Could you verify then Brash will not recieve more than those $500??
And why is it that we could have more quality modules when we are paying for it??

My core74 link is a link to a webhosting company, so I provide a service just like you did for Brash, but that's not the point, is't?

What I am saying is, commercial modules, fine with me, but let it stand apart from Xoops.

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/20/2004 11:30 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

Could you verify then Brash will not recieve more than those $500??

No I cannot verify or guarantee that - I trust that when the donat-O-meter on ams.it-hq.org gets closer to the $250 target, Brash will release the module.

Quote:

why is it that we could have more quality modules when we are paying for it?

I would not have made AMS if I had not been paid for it. If Brash had tried himself, he would have either failed or it would have taken much longer (freely quoted from Brash himself, I'm not trying to brag

)
I may be going too far in calling this a quality module, but I firmly believe that it is useful and can some good stuff - and I think that if this was a more accepted method of creating modules, more people would do so and the community would get more quality modules, albeit for a fee at least in the beginning.

Quote:

What I am saying is, commercial modules, fine with me, but let it stand apart from Xoops.

Why? I for one would like to see more professionalism in XOOPS. The XOOPS community has already too many users and not enough developers (just look at the module requests to finished modules ratio) so if we could have a culture more willing to chip in, we might be able to attract more developers.

Re: Article Management System Module

phppp Published 10/20/2004 12:17 XOOPS Contributor Joined 01/25/2004 Comments 2857

Mith, I totally agree with you on what you have done with this AMS. You worked on it, you got paid. That's good. Actually I have been asked to develop paid modules but I simply can not get time. Also, my partner complains that I am spending too much time on un-paid XOOPS modules. Once the present modules done, I am going to accept paid modules.
However, in my opinion, as a developer, you'd better keep silent in this topic. You do not need to explain anything for the module owners.

For this AMS, I would call it: Advertising Management System. It serves the module owner so well so far!

As I said above, 'I hope I could get time/money to donate so that I could accesse the code', actually I am not willing to do that unless I know where the donation to go.
Will it be donated to XOOPS Forge Dev? Good, I am going to donate in 24 hours. If not? Come on, find a better place for showing off and advertising!

Re: Article Management System Module

jmass Published 10/20/2004 14:19 Friend of XOOPS Joined 12/18/2003 Comments 524

You guys are killing me!

For some XOOPS is a hobby. For others it is a living. Who cares. There is the GPL and what it allows you to do. Period.

We all take from this great community. And just like a real community, there are those that give back more than others. I don't give much back myself. I have only released one really crappy half done module, and one halfway decent theme. So what. No one derides me. (that I know of)

Draven makes money with Xoops, me too. Brash wants to recoup some of his development costs, me too. Mith just wants to get paid for development, me too. Others host Xoops, me too. Yet others just host their family photo album on Xoops, me too. But people's thoughts about XOOPS and money being seperate is just plain...(edit for politeness)... short sighted. Money and only money will make XOOPS polished and viable for higher level commercial work. Apache (one of the most respected OS projects) is not all volenteer all the time. Money has changed hands, and a quality project has resulted. Many other examples can be sighted.

I have to date over $2,000 cash invested in XOOPS in different projects. I am at this very moment in discussions to spend thousands of dollars more on module development. I have chosen to release the last module I paid for at no charge. I may do the same for the next ones... I may not. That is all up to me. I could go crazy and try to ransom some money to defray the development. That is my right. (But I won't for the reasons sighted my other posts on the subject).

The point is: The only thing that matters is what you are allowed to do under the GPL!

Everything else is personal opinion. Stop ragging on people who are within their rights. Free software is about giving people freedom. If you detract from them when they choose to exercise their rights, how are you helping freesoftware?

JMass

Re: Article Management System Module

brash Published 10/20/2004 14:54 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

I've found it very hard to find words to effectively convey just how upsetting I find the comments and insinuations made by incarma and phppp. I most certainly don't pretend to be anywhere near perfect, but both of you seriously need to look at what you are saying more closely. You both seem to have tried to dehumanise me and portray me as some outsider looking for nothing other than to make money and/or simply off load the cost of development of this module to the XOOPS community. I find this deeply offensive, espcecially when I have (a) been an active member of the XOOPS community for far longer than either of you, and (b) have been far more active in the support forums helping others than either of you. There is no doubting that both of you have made tremendous contributions for XOOPS and its community, and I am not, and would not ever try and cast any shadow on that contribution. In return all I would ask is that you return the same curtesy. You have both made ill informed and somewhat misleading statements. Have either of you actually tried using the module?

These are my motives for wanting to make this module available to the XOOPS public;

- It is a custom built article manager targeted for high performance, and use with large article repositories with widespread application. This requirement has got to fit the needs of several THOUSAND XOOPS based sites, and having been involved with XOOPS for so long my first thought was that we shouldn't keep this module to ourselves, and that the wider XOOPS community could draw great benefit from it. I also felt this module would do a lot for strengthening the XOOPS product.

- My mate (jctsup1) and I who employed Mith to develop this module for a site we run together offering free support for IIS webserver represent no company, organisation or anything other than ourselves as individuals. We are regular Joes working regualar day jobs, and like everyone here have a keen interest in Xoops. The costs of this module to both of us financially has been huge! I have no doubt we recieved mates rates from Mith, but just due to the shear amount of hours Mith poured into this module, it was always going to come with a equally huge bill. I have pretty much gone without any spending money for the last 2 months to be able to afford this module, and my partner is not a great deal different. We both wanted (in particular myself) this module to see the light of day for the XOOPS community, but both feel that due to the very high cost of the module that we could not shoulder the entire cost of it if the entire XOOPS community were to benefit. We felt that the only way that would be fair to the XOOPS community, and our own financial well being was to ask that the XOOPS community (if interested) to help cover the costs of a small portion of the total development costs. In fact, what we have asked for as a donation target to be met prior to release is less than one third of what it has cost my partner and I. This meaning that we are STILL shouldering the vast majority of the cost, and are in NO WAY making any profit from this exercise.

Some questions/comments for you incarma and phppp;

1) Incarma, you suggest that I am simply trying to offload development costs. Do you think it is fair to expect that myself and my partner shoulder the entire financial burden of this module when it is the wider community that will draw the greatest benefit if it's released? If so, why? And don't give me the line that we all invest in Xoops, as I know this, and have myself have donated financially in XOOPS (which incidently I assume you haven't by the absense of you "Friend of Xoops" rank) and countless amounts of time in submitting Theme's, hack's and a great deal of user support on the forums. There is a difference between being generous, and being financially suicidal. Also, if you want a garantee that the module will be released once the target is reached, ask me, not Mith. I am right here, and not going anywhere. Frankly I find it quite offensive that you'd question my integrity in such a way in the first place.

2) Phppp, why should Mith be silent on this. Even if he did get paid he has a VERY large time investment in this module, and he most certainly isn't speaking for me. Both my mate and I are fully aware of what a huge effort the Dev team now, and in the past have put into XOOPS as I've been a member since early 2003 and my mate has been a member since mid 2002! However, what you are suggesting is that we donate several hundred US dollars each in the form of having this module developed. A noble suggestion no doubt, but can you afford to make such a financial contribution? I for one cannot! This is an XOOPS module, once our donation target has been met there will be no additonal charges, and it will be free for all. All it would take is 25 out of well over 22,000 members to set asside the cost of a going to a movie and this module will be set for a definite release. If not make it know here on the single largest XOOPS site in the world, then where should we make the awareness of new modules known?

Re: Article Management System Module

incama Published 10/20/2004 16:47 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/24/2003 Comments 513

Dear Brash,

I'm deeply sorry if I offended you in any way. This topic is just an example of discussions all over the world concerning gpl and open source in general. I know gpl is a part of xoops, but XOOPS is not a part of gpl. Sure I know money injection could bring XOOPS onto a higher level, but it's not a garantee. Look at ,for instance, the succes of Open Office, Mozilla. They never thought of charging money for their product and they will have alot of development costs.

To be short, I only want to prevent XOOPS turning into another phpnuke, and that money never must play a key role in development of Xoops.

Again, sorry brash, not hard feelings

Re: Article Management System Module

phppp Published 10/20/2004 17:12 XOOPS Contributor Joined 01/25/2004 Comments 2857

Quote:

2) ...This is an XOOPS module, once our donation target has been met there will be no additonal charges, and it will be free for all.

If you have stated this somewhere, I will apologize for my ignorance.
Otherwise, I would insist: plz leave Xoops:News:Modules pure before the AMS is available for regular xoopsers!

BTW: please do not forward the discussion to Mith anymore. He is the developer I always respect and appreciate and he did nothing wrong with this story.

Re: Article Management System Module

carnuke Published 10/20/2004 17:36 Home away from home Joined 11/05/2003 Comments 1955

This is an interesting thread that I think reveals some important issues surrounding freeware or open source. End users are too used to getting a great product for free and maybe just begin to expect that as a right. Open source and freeware is a peculiar phenomonon. Where else will you find skilled people giving away thousands of hours of expertise for nothing except sincere thanks and some kudos? It certainly does not happen in industry and commerce and if it does happen, it's a calculated incentive to induce an add-on purchace. I am completley sold on the value of open source, but I can also see that a fork of paid for development also has its benefits and spin offs. The main benefit as I see it, is to entise and draw quality developers that might otherwise not bother in favour of alternative financial rewards. The spin off is that paid for development will usually filter down to freeware levels, once the costs are covered. It also tends to raise the bar for quality control.

This is ultimately a win-win situation.

Looking at organisations like Invision we see a working example of how this can work.

I do NOT advocate losing the open source status with Xoops, but I do think we all need to be more tolerant and open to creative changes that can benefit the long term future of this CMS.

There will be strong feelings both ways, there usually is where money is concerned. So what is the alternative? Maybe as an organisation we need to acknowledge and recognise the considerable skill and committment of our developers in a way that is meaningful for them and for the users. We must learn to appreciate them or else they will use XOOPS as a learning experience and then move on.

Pity there is no recognised certificate for open source collaboration and development.

Any ideas?

Re: Article Management System Module

phppp Published 10/20/2004 17:47 XOOPS Contributor Joined 01/25/2004 Comments 2857

No one dislike the paid module developing. At least I would be glad to accept those paid project once I get time.
The problem is that: Before the module is available for non-dontating users, why it is listed in the xoops-news-modules? Isn't kind of misleading?

Someones have already proposed to establish a developer-union-like organization to enhance XOOPS module development, both quality and speed.
I totally agree on that, why still no action?

Re: Article Management System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/20/2004 17:48 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Well said, Carnuke.

The main reason why I have been so zealously defending this is that things are going completely out of proportions.

Incama says that he does not want to see money play a key part in XOOPS development. I couldn't agree more. But from a modest donation until a certain limit is reached and on to "a key part" - that's quite a jump.

Re: Article Management System Module

incama Published 10/20/2004 18:02 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/24/2003 Comments 513

As I see things,. all modules are part of Xoops, how small or big they are,.but why not use a donation system for modules?

Re: Article Management System Module

Published 10/20/2004 18:24 Updated 10/20/2004 19:37 Joined Comments

Brash,

With all due respect but I feel that you are trying to recuperate your fees for a module that YOU needed and wanted for your own use to use on your own website. By saying that ‘once some people have paid for this module you will release it for free’ is nothing short of immoral and actually in my opinion does go against everything that ‘open source’ stands for and the GPL.

The part I actually object to, ‘once so many people have paid you and you will release it’ is wrong. If this module as you say was converted to your own spec’s then you should either keep it as a private module or in the good spirit of the open source and XOOPS give it to the public without attaching the demands that you have. Really, rather than charging for the code as you will be doing, I believe others would have felt more comfortable with people paying for the support you would give with this software.

Before you say yes but we had someone paid to develop this module for us and we need to recuperate our fees, you must remember people in the XOOPS community never asked you to do this and you can’t really expect people to pay for something when they know that they can wait and get it for free surely? You wanted it, you paid for it. $500 is nothing compared to the amount of time developers have spent on software that you use now which has been released as open source both in time and money they spent writing them.

Please do not get me wrong Brash, I don’t disagree with what you’re doing just with the way you are doing it. We never asked you to spend $500 getting this module made, but we never asked Ono, Skalpa, Catzwolf or any other developer to spend countless hours, days, months and years working on code that we all use for free. So either keep it or release it as a gift to the XOOPS Community like many others have done but don’t expect people to pay for something they will get for free later.

As to the fact that WF-Section has a high impact on a server, yes this was true. But what Mithrandir forgot to explain to you was this. The problem with this module is due to the use of some of the XOOPS Core classes and functions, namely when storing usernames in one array and $mtyree class. These two alone which are used quite a bit in WF-Sections have caused so many problems for us and rather than certain developers going around and telling everyone that their modules aren’t good enough should fix those issues in XOOPS first

Again I do not have issues of people charging for modules etc, I just believe the way your doing it is wrong for everyone at Xoops.

Kind Regards
Scott

Re: Article Management System Module

charpres Published 10/20/2004 19:10 Not too shy to talk Joined 09/04/2003 Comments 168

The reason I stated the demo version does not tell me enough is that my applications depend on an article management system that allows full integration of existing complex HTML pages. I don't think a demo system (I could be wrong) really shows you how well this is accomplised unless you can somehow demo it on your own server.

I don't think there is any substitute for uploading a module to your own server and running the code through its paces in whatever environment you have created for yourself.

Re: Article Managment System Module

JackJ Published 10/20/2004 20:59 Community Support Member Joined 08/31/2003 Comments 747

A bit heavy this. I once worked in IT Training as a contractor, many developers I had to work with were hard nasty rude characters who lived in a strange geeky world..:) DOn't argue with them, you will lose..they will twist your words edgeways, and put you down..they are a proud judgemental race...

Wfsection is the finest content module around anywhere developed by a fine Scotsman, lots of current queries or not, (noticed your weel worded dig on the wfsections site), its fast, easy to use once you get into it, and has many more features than this module. You should have spent your time further developing wfsections and you know it. Wfsection is a giant compared to this, I don't need this unreleased module..

I am trying out being nasty and offensive, how am I doing ?..

Win an arguement, lose a friend..

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/20/2004 21:10 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

I am trying out being nasty and offensive, how am I doing ?..

You are doing well.

Calling my attempts to point the WF team's attention to areas that could (and in my opinion *should*) be optimised - and how it could be done - a "weel worded dig" was especially nasty and very offensive and I sure hope you are kidding.

Re: Article Managment System Module

jctsup1 Published 10/20/2004 22:41 Not too shy to talk Joined 05/23/2002 Comments 146

I have refrained from replying to these comments but certain things have been said that I feel I need to address myself. This will be my only post on the subject.

I find it pathetic that people who have not put in the time that Brash or myself have put into furthering the XOOPS cause are throwing stones.

I don't understand what the problem is. If you think we are out to make money or the module sucks, fine. No one is holding a gun to your head to donate. Move on with your life.

The reality is that this type of module is the wave of the future - not the AMS module itself but customized, "paid for" modules. I know this question has already been posted but where does Open Source equal free?

In my opinion, this has little to do with GPL, WfSections, PHPNuke or any of that other stuff --- what it boils down to is that some people are very threatened by all this & will scream bloody murder until they get their way & we release the module for free or give it as a "gift" to the community. Sorry that is not going to happen.

In closing, we put togther a module that we needed & think that fills a gap & ask that before you pass judgement that you register on the site & actually take a look at the module.

Best Regards
--------
Jeffrey

Re: Article Managment System Module

brash Published 10/21/2004 0:16 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Please guys, don't let this degrade into a "my module is better than yours" slanging match. As I said in an earlier post, WF-Section is without a doubt the most feature rich article manager out there, and it is going to take a mamoth effort for anyone to topple that title. Likewise I have said from the very start AMS is targeted towards high performance, large scale article repositories with a high degree of scalability. I do have some test data showing the SQL query counts of AMS, Articles 0.17, News 1.2 and WF-Section 2.07 that demonstrates this which I'll be posting on the AMS demo site if anyone was interested in looking at it. What it shows is all of the above modules with exception of AMS suffer vastly increased query counts in the index and category views as you increase the number of topics and articles. AMS on the otherhand stays the same. I am not trying to say that AMS is better than yours, but just try to demonstrate, and reaffirm the the statement that AMS is primarily about performance and scalability of large document repositories.

@incama

Thanks for the apology, it is most definately accepted . And I apologise if I got a bit emotional on you. This is the first time that I have ever done something like this and I've just had a bit of a hard time dealing with peoples negativity when we have poured a huge amount of effort into this over the last 5 months of our lives, as well as a huge amount of money (relative to my own personal situation of course).
@phppp

How is it misleading? This is Xoops, and AMS is an XOOPS module. It might be feasible to seperate free from payment modules, but this is not a decision for me to make. I simply submitted my news item to the one that was most appropriate.

@wfsection

That is your opinion, and of course you are entitled to it. However, you are wrong about my motives, and what's more I don't think you know me well enough to make such comments. I am NOT telling/forcing anyone to make a contribution if they do not wish to. In fact I have been very specific is stating that I am ASKING those who would like to use this module that they make a donation to help contribute to the cost of development. If you can explain to me how that is immorral, then go for it. By that logic all the aid agencies (Care, Red Cross, World Vision) in the world are immorral! They are doing something that nobody asked them to do, yet they ask everyone for donations, not just those who would benefit directly from their service.

The fact is article management is a VERY common requirement for those running XOOPS sites, so even though this is a custom module as you point out, it has VERY wide application. But I suppose this is a fundemental difference between you and I. You seem to prefer the idea of this (or I ssume any) module going to ground as a private venture, never to see the light of day for the general XOOPS public rather than for anyone having to pay a cent for it. Myself on the otherhand believe that the power of XOOPS comes in choice, and that if a couple of dozen people that WANT to use the module and ARE able to afford it have to donate a few bucks to help shoulder the costs then so be it. The good FAR outweighs the bad, and that is not just a matter of opinion. If two dozen people donate $10 each, we are there. This module is then freely available to at least 22276 (at the time of writting this) plus god knows how many unregistered users. Can you please explain to me then how this could possibly be a bad thing for Xoops?

In saying this though I do take on board what you are saying in that you don't aggree with the way I'm going about this. I must admit this is the first time I have ever attempted something like this, so if you have any ideas/suggestion of how best to go about it, then I really would appreciate hearing them. Please don't suggest that I just offer it for download and ask for donations on the side as we both know that most people will not pay unless they have to.

@charpres,

Ah, ok. Got your point now. The demo site will give you a very good indication of product functionality, but won't give you any idea really regarding intergration into specific and custom envirnments. In that case you are corret, using the module on your own site is the only real test.

@JackJ

I'm just going to ignore you coz you're grumpy .

Re: Article Managment System Module

Alan-A Published 10/21/2004 7:42 Not too shy to talk Joined 02/17/2004 Comments 191

Hi,
Quote:

test data showing the SQL query counts of ... WF-Section 2.07 that demonstrates this

Good to know this - such information is worth its weight in gold when you're planning a site.

I'd have thought that a module which was developed by a (fellow) Scotsman would have been VERY efficient with resources....
(Was only a joke.)

Alan

Re: Article Managment System Module

brash Published 10/21/2004 8:34 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Hi Alan,

I'm going to defer this to the weekend if I can as at the moment my data only includes raw SQL queries, and not execution times. What I plan to do is run a series of tests showing SQL query count and approximate execution times (average of three attempts each test) on a PII 350 with 256MBof RAM, an Athlon 1.2 GHz with 512MB of RAM and a P4 2.8Ghz with 1GB of RAM. I will be doing eleven tests ranging from one topic and one article through to 100 topics and 100 articles per topic (10,000 articles total) which should cover every environment likely to eventuate. Using the data run from these three machines should then give users a better indication of what performance they can expect from their own machines.

Re: Article Managment System Module

amayer Published 10/21/2004 9:06 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/18/2003 Comments 82

To jctsup1, brash et all...

Quote:

jctsup1 said: "The reality is that this type of module is the wave of the future - not the AMS module itself but customized, "paid for" modules. I know this question has already been posted but where does Open Source equal free"

This is the problem I have: I agree that XOOPS (and modules) need more financial input to be successful and that money needs to be generated, and that open source does not mean no cost. However, I don't believe that that this ransomware model is "the wave of the future" as you state - and are fiercely defending.

By announcing to the XOOPS developer community that the source code will be released once you have enough money is effectively asking other developers to cough up. The idea behind open source is that developers share secrets and that money is made from value-added activities and services.

I'm not saying you have done something "wrong" - I just disagree that your approach is long term or has any future.

For example, if all open source software was developed using your approach then Linux, Apache, Php, Mysql etc etc would still be on beta versions. Indeed the Internet would probably be stuck in the 1980's still. Open source has been successful for all the *opposite* reasons that you and Mith have been preaching in this forum. Put simply some of them are:

1) When people share source code, then solutions get made at light-speed at a momentum that becomes unstoppable.

2) Sharing source code means that the best work succeeds, because nobody gains an advantage from keeping things secret.

3) The end-user gets the best deal because of (1) and (2), and the end-user is where the cash comes from. A happy-end user will more likely part with money.

I could say more. But please understand that what I'm not saying is that you are bad people, I'm just saying you are *wrong* in your assumptions that this approach is the "wave of the future".

And it's worrying that you are all defending this so strongly - especially as this is your first attempt at this. If all XOOPS is developed on this basis of "hand over your money to get the code" then it will die. Period.

So I guess your next question to me now is "So, how else can we get money from our module?". The answer is beyond the scope of this discussion, but basically you have to be creative and produce excellent work, that's how. You don't have to look far to see who is making money from Open Source.

Hope this helps,

Andy

Re: Article Managment System Module

brash Published 10/21/2004 9:46 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Hi Andy,

I don't disaggree with anything you have said in your three points there. However I don't know what gave you the idea that I had an expectation that developers contribute to the modules financial cost. If I had posted this on the dev.xoops.org site I could understand, but I simply wouldn't do that because I think the developers of this community already do all they can. Although I don't disclude developers if they wish to make a donation, my view would be that the users would be the main contributors to this as ultimately they would stand to benefit the most from being able to use it.

Re: Article Managment System Module

amayer Published 10/21/2004 10:16 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/18/2003 Comments 82

Hi Brash,

Thanks for your reply.

Quote:

I don't know what gave you the idea that I had an expectation that developers contribute to the modules financial cost.

I thought this because you are charging for the source code as opposed to value-added or other end-user services. In the real world, source code is only useful to developers and end-users don't have any use for it.

It's a subtle point, I know, and requires a paradigm shift in thinking.

Andy

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/21/2004 10:18 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

1) When people share source code, then solutions get made at light-speed at a momentum that becomes unstoppable.

2) Sharing source code means that the best work succeeds, because nobody gains an advantage from keeping things secret.

3) The end-user gets the best deal because of (1) and (2), and the end-user is where the cash comes from. A happy-end user will more likely part with money.

I see that and I agree with that. But I am also reading that people are telling Brash to not release this module unless he does it for free. That is, either he keeps it to himself or he releases it for free.

Where does "everything that ‘open source’ stands for" - as Scott put it - fit in there?
Where is the source code sharing in that?

Quote:

If all XOOPS is developed on this basis of "hand over your money to get the code" then it will die.

Why are you blowing it out of proportions again?

/Mith *feeling like we are going around and around and around...*

I'm just gonna stop now. Getting nowhere.

Re: Article Managment System Module

Shine Published 10/21/2004 10:20 Just can't stay away Joined 07/22/2002 Comments 822

On the end, the whole discussion is about charging money and/or free distribution of modules.

Suggestion:
Since there are a lot users who make money of their xoopswebsite (running within the CMS xoops), I think they are the persons who could spend a small onation concidering modules like AMS.
As earlier said: there are a lot of users (like myself) who have a website providing interesting information but don't make money out of it.
As for me: I am glad to keep (with a lot of financial struggle) my Dutch adoption community/informationwebsite up and running. Therefore I unfortunately don't have the money to pay/donate for any module or whatsoever.(wish I could!)
The only personal 'bring back into the XOOPS community' I can give and gave is help other (dutch) people with the XOOPS system and delivered a simple mylinks rewrite into addresses. (see Dutch XOOPS Support)

AMS looks very interesting and I really hope this module will someday, with help from other xoopsers, be available for ppl like me.

Grtz., Shine

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/21/2004 10:21 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Quote:

In the real world, source code is only useful to developers and end-users don't have any use for it.

I just had to comment on this one. Will stop after this.
Doesn't end-users have any use for the source code? How on earth are you going to use (i.e. install on your own website) a XOOPS module without the source code?

Re: Article Managment System Module

amayer Published 10/21/2004 10:36 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/18/2003 Comments 82

Quote:

Doesn't end-users have any use for the source code? How on earth are you going to use (i.e. install on your own website) a XOOPS module without the source code?

You're a student, right? Well I don't know if you have much experience working in corporate IT environments, but I'll assume not for the purpose of this answer (so apologies if this is patronising)...

Usually developers install the website, and the end-users are different people who use the site (ie. register, submit news etc etc). In the corporate business world they are not normally the same people.

If XOOPS is to appeal to corporate users, and professional developers of such sites, then we need to get out of the mind set that users of the sites and developers are the same people.

Andy

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/21/2004 10:57 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Why thank you - that was indeed patronising.

However, I mistook end-users for users/webmasters. Where are they in your description, by the way?
What services should developers offer end-users?

Re: Article Managment System Module

amayer Published 10/21/2004 11:16 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/18/2003 Comments 82

Quote:

What services should developers offer end-users?

This is not for me to answer. But see the following link for some inspiration:

101 Ways to Make Money off Open Source

...and yes, ransomware is suggested by one of the commenters.

Andy

PS. I thought we were going to shutup now

Re: Article Managment System Module

Mithrandir Published 10/21/2004 11:25 XOOPS is my life! Joined 06/21/2003 Comments 6320

Aren't you talking about services from developers to webmasters/users?

I was going to shut up - but that was about the AMS case. Not making money off XOOPS in general.

Re: Article Managment System Module

rowdie Published 10/21/2004 14:00 Updated 10/21/2004 14:02 Just can't stay away Joined 07/21/2004 Comments 846

@ amayer
You didn't answer Mith's question asking for your definition of end-users. I think it's important that you define it for yourself because after reading your comments I think you aren't too clear on that point.

Quote:

By announcing to the XOOPS developer community that the source code will be released once you have enough money is effectively asking other developers to cough up.

The announcement was that the *module* will be released, which is not the same as saying the source code will be released. In PHP you cannot have the module without also having the code as it is not a compiled language - not in this instance, anyway (hope I'm not being too patronising here, but you seem to have missed this point). Website administrators who have been looking for a module that will perform the functions of AMS now have one available. Where do developers come into the equation here?

Quote:

In the real world, source code is only useful to developers and end-users don't have any use for it.

If you are talking about end-users as site administrators then they would have no site to administer without the 'source code' as you put it (see my point about PHP above). If you mean the visitors to a site, the same applies to them. Maybe you should call the modules 'modules' and not 'source code' because it seems to be causing some confusion.

Quote:

Usually developers install the website, and the end-users are different people who use the site (ie. register, submit news etc etc). In the corporate business world they are not normally the same people.

If XOOPS is to appeal to corporate users, and professional developers of such sites, then we need to get out of the mind set that users of the sites and developers are the same people.

If you are talking about corporate users then you seem to be forgetting the fact that they belong to the same corporation. Or are you proposing that only the developers pay for the modules that everyone uses? Because I can assure you that is not the case in the 'real world'.

Your arguments are too general and vague and don't really make sense. "A happy end-user will more likely part with money"? What are you talking about here? If you're talking about administrator/webmaster then they have the demo to play with and if they like it they can choose to donate to get the module - so that's an argument in favour of releasing it this way? That's the way I read it, which seems to contradict your earlier statements.

I was going to stay out of this discussion but that patronizing post of yours (which didn't address the quote you posted with it, by the way) called for a response.

Rowd

Re: Article Managment System Module

amayer Published 10/22/2004 13:34 Friend of XOOPS Joined 10/18/2003 Comments 82

@rowd,

Quote:

You didn't answer Mith's question asking for your definition of end-users. I think it's important that you define it for yourself because after reading your comments I think you aren't too clear on that point.

I thought that was too patronising to say, but here goes: By end-user I mean the person who interacts with the software rather than the person who makes the software.

Quote:

Your arguments are too general and vague and don't really make sense.

OK. You don't get it. Fine. Let's move on. I'm sorry I really don't have time explain this paradigm shift in more detail. Fortunately there is a good article that introduces the concept here:

The Open Source Paradigm Shift

The beauty of GPL is that people are free to use and implement it in different ways. Time will tell which approaches work best. All I'm trying to say is that I don't think this release approach is the "wave of the future" as Mith has been saying.

Andy

Re: Article Managment System Module

Speed Published 10/22/2004 13:54 Quite a regular Joined 05/18/2004 Comments 310

Thanks for posting about the module and giving a working example for us to kick the tires on and test drive a bit.

Shareware is a great concept. I'm glad to see folks keeping it alive and extending it in a reasonable way to gpl'd software. Hang in there.

Re: Article Management System Module

malexandria Published 10/22/2004 21:28 Quite a regular Joined 12/23/2001 Comments 281

The one question that I have is if we make a donation are we guaranteed to get the module? Because I won't pay a donation fee, unless that is made explicitely clear. Which at the moment it's not.

Re: Article Management System Module

brash Published 10/23/2004 0:52 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Hi Speed,

Thankyou for the kind words and support, it's very much appreciated !

Hi malexandria,

I can see exactly what you're asking, and that is propbably my fault for not making it clear enough. All donators of $10US or more will get a copy of AMS not less than one month prior to a general public release IF the donation target is met. If the target isn't met then the module won't be relesed at all (even to donators) and I will return everyones donations minus only the PayPal fees. I know people like garantees of what they'd get for their contribution, but unfortunately under the GPL the only leverage we have is prior to releasing the code. As soon as even one copy gets out there, the holder of that copy is free to distribute it as they like. I hope you can then see why even if this isn't method isn't ideal, it is one of few ways I can see of doing it that gives us a reasonable chance of reaching our donation target.

Having said or that though, I just updated our donations from the last 12 hours, and we are now sitting just $45 away from our target donations in just 3 days. Due to this rate of donations, I REALLY feel it is not a matter of IF the module will be released, but rather WHEN!

Re: Article Management System Module

malexandria Published 10/23/2004 11:38 Quite a regular Joined 12/23/2001 Comments 281

thanks for the clarification!

Re: Article Management System Module

brash Published 10/26/2004 4:34 Friend of XOOPS Joined 04/10/2003 Comments 2206

Woohoo, we reached our donation target ! This module will be now freely available to the XOOPS community by the end of November ! Thanks to all of you who donated !

Re: Article Management System Module

Shine Published 10/27/2004 12:32 Updated 10/27/2004 12:33 Just can't stay away Joined 07/22/2002 Comments 822

@ donators:
I wanna say Thank You to the donators. They made it happen this wonderfull module will be available for everyone and those who unfortunately don't have the money (like me) for it. May I at least offer you a virtual pint.....

@ Brash:
Great great, yes yes, look forward to its release!

Grtz., Shine

Login

Username

Password

Remember me

Search

Advanced Search

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal:	$15.00
Due Date:	Nov 30
Gross Amount:	$0.00
Net Balance:	$0.00
Left to go:	$15.00

Latest GitHub Commits

{{ record.sha.slice(0, 7) }} - {{ record.commit.message | truncate }}

{{ record.commit.author.name }} {{ record.commit.author.date | formatDate }}