Custom BB Code Manager Discussion

[Cheesegrits]

I had no idea either. I just checked the version history and updates on the resource, then used the main Download button, which I asusmed would get me the latest version, and seemed to jive with the updates list.

Cedric, is there any particular reason you are maintaining a separate version history and download links in the discussion thread, rather than updating the resource?

OBTW, yes, the problem is fixed now I've update to the latest and greatest.

Thanks for the quick response.

-- hugh

 

[Cheesegrits]

BTW, is there an XF resource manager URL I can feed it? Won't this URL get me 1.3.4, rather than 1.3.7.1?

-- hugh

 

[The Grand Potentate]

BTW, is there an XF resource manager URL I can feed it? Won't this URL get me 1.3.4, rather than 1.3.7.1?

-- hugh

no. reading back on the thread I found out that there aren't going to be any more updates to the RM.

 

[Jeremy]

no. reading back on the thread I found out that there aren't going to be any more updates to the RM.

Where are you getting this? I have made no such claim.

 

[The Grand Potentate]

Where are you getting this? I have made no such claim.

Its possible I misinterpreted comments made. ARE you planning on updating the RM?

 

[Jeremy]

Its possible I misinterpreted comments made. ARE you planning on updating the RM?

When an official update from me is ready, the resource will be updated.

 

[Biker]

Cédric really needs to fork his version to a new resource.

 

[Jeremy]

Cédric really needs to fork his version to a new resource.

BBCM is officially released under a proprietary license, meaning without my permission he cannot do that. Some may consider the posts in this thread that he has released as copyright infringement.

 

[cclaerhout]

BBCM is officially released under a proprietary license, meaning without my permission he cannot do that. Some may consider the posts in this thread that he has released as copyright infringement.

Which part of the code should be considered as a copyright infringement? The names of the sql fields?

 

[Jeremy]

Which part of the code should be considered as a copyright infringement? The names of the sql fields?

We've had this discussion in private, you've heard my stance and it won't change. I will not bring it out into the public.

 

[Martok]

BBCM is officially released under a proprietary license, meaning without my permission he cannot do that. Some may consider the posts in this thread that he has released as copyright infringement.

Some of us are very grateful for Cédric keeping this resource up-to-date and improving it.

 

[Jeremy]

Some of us are very grateful for Cédric keeping this resource up-to-date and improving it.

Which is why I haven't pushed the matter of him releasing updates. Unless they are run through me first, they are still not considered official. My stance remains. Regardless, BBCM is still under a proprietary license which means a fork cannot be created.

 

[cclaerhout]

We've had this discussion in private, you've heard my stance and it won't change. I will not bring it out into the public.

No we didn't. You just said me you don't want to publish the "updates" (I repeat, the code has been rewritten except for old models) because I've coded under CC licence.

 

[Jeremy]

No we didn't. You just said me you don't want to publish the "updates" (I repeat, the code has been rewritten except for old models) because I've coded under CC licence.

As I previously stated, the license cannot change without my approval. It remains under my proprietary license. Any fork is against my license. You cannot legally take a proprietary license and switch it to a different, open source license without prior permission. This is my final stance, and it will not change. BBCM is under a proprietary license, the work you have done is appreciated, but you cannot change the license.

 

[Martok]

How about you both work together on this for the benefit of the Xenforo community? BBCM is a great resource and one that many Xenforo admins use. I'm sure we'd all like to see its continued development rather than an argument over copyright and updates.

 

[cclaerhout]

As I previously stated, the license cannot change without my approval. It remains under my proprietary license. Any fork is against my license. You cannot legally take a proprietary license and switch it to a different, open source license without prior permission. This is my final stance, and it will not change. BBCM is under a proprietary license, the work you have done is appreciated, but you cannot change the license.

What you seem not to understand, which is curious, is that all the code has been rewritten except old models. And I don't think there's a copyright on the fact to use a Bb Code listener to extend the XenForo formatter. Now you may suggest that there's a copyright on the concept of creating an addon to allow users to create custom Bb Codes on XenForo. I'm sure some developers will greatly appreciate this idea.

As I previously stated, the only reasons that kept me sending updates here that we could collaborate and also because having another Bb Code manager would be ridiculous especially because XenForo will release their own. That's really a pity you've got that behaviour. But as already said too, "life goes on".

 

[Jeremy]

How about you both work together on this for the benefit of the Xenforo community? BBCM is a great resource and one that many Xenforo admins use. I'm sure we'd all like to see its continued development rather than an argument over copyright and updates.

The differences between us will not make this happen. Updates are planned and are coming.

What you seem not to understand, which is curious, is that all the code has been rewritten except old models. And I don't think there's a copyright on the fact to use a Bb Code listener to extend the XenForo formatter. Now you may suggest that there's a copyright on the concept of creating an addon to allow users to create custom Bb Codes on XenForo. I'm sure some developers will greatly appreciate this idea.

As I previously stated, the only reasons that kept me sending updates here that we could collaborate and also because having another Bb Code manager would be ridiculous especially because XenForo will release their own. That's really a pity you've got that behaviour. But as already said too, "life goes on".

An idea is not copyrightable, the actual code is. BBCM was coded by me, so the exact code used is copyright to me. When you chose to, without my permission, come to me with an update, you placed the code under my license, under my copyright, and under my ultimate control. This does not give you the right to rerelease BBCM under a new license. Period.

 

[cclaerhout]

The differences between us will not make this happen. Updates are planned and are coming.


An idea is not copyrightable, the actual code is. BBCM was coded by me, so the exact code used is copyright to me. When you chose to, without my permission, come to me with an update, you placed the code under my license, under my copyright, and under my ultimate control. This does not give you the right to rerelease BBCM under a new license. Period.

Whaou... I have no words for this. I let you to your "ultimate control". My god.

 

[Cheesegrits]

@martok - afaik, KK is working on a 1.2 version, that rewrites most of the code to share his common "framework". And from reading this RM, has obviously been supportive of Cedric keeping 1.1 going. He is simply asserting his licensing terms, which is entirely his privilege. If Cedric wishes to work on the code, and post unofficial updates, and KK doesn't mind, that's one thing. Releasing those changes with a different license is quite another thing, especially if KK has made it clear he does not want the license changed.

Personally, I'd like to see a compromise, where KK allows Cedric to fork the code, and maintain that as a separate RM page, with a clear attribution to the original resource, until KK's 1.2 version is released.

-- hugh

 

[Jeremy]

@martok - afaik, KK is working on a 1.2 version, that rewrites most of the code to share his common "framework". And from reading this RM, has obviously been supportive of Cedric keeping 1.1 going. He is simply asserting his licensing terms, which is entirely his privilege. If Cedric wishes to work on the code, and post unofficial updates, and KK doesn't mind, that's one thing. Releasing those changes with a different license is quite another thing, especially if KK has made it clear he does not want the license changed.

Personally, I'd like to see a compromise, where KK allows Cedric to fork the code, and maintain that as a separate RM page, with a clear attribution to the original resource, until KK's 1.2 version is released.

-- hugh

I will not be based on the XI framework. The overhead and extra code is unnecessary for this modification.