JFusion plugin for Xenforo

[iTuN3r]

I am sure it will come in due time and yes i feel sorry for you .

 

[Paul B]

Reading back through the thread, a license has already been made available free of charge, Jamie and VonDoom offered to contribute and Anthony Parsons pledged $300.

iTuN3r and kyrgyz also offered to donate after the work was complete.

 

[iTuN3r]

Reading back through the thread, a license has already been made available free of charge, Jamie and VonDoom offered to contribute and Anthony Parsons pledged $300.

iTuN3r and kyrgyz also offered to donate after the work was complete.

But he wants his target of donation completed ahead before he starts working on it which completely out of box for me and i am sure many people would like to see the Product before jumping over it doesn't matter if the Person has done top Plugins in internet.

 

[MilesDB]

People got burned on vB4 pre-sale. That's why they are reluctant to jump in on naked promise.

 

[infinite.loop]

But he wants his target of donation completed ahead before he starts working on it which completely out of box for me and i am sure many people would like to see the Product before jumping over it doesn't matter if the Person has done top Plugins in internet.

I would not have any problem to give away 100-200 Euos (like I allready proposed to an long time jFusion Developer) to an developer who:
- has build up some reputation/experience (i.e. allready created such bridges)
- approaches this task on a professional level (i.e. talk to XenForo staff first, then setup a page for this project with an outline of what is going to happen, etc.)

Since none of that is the case, I won't donate any money in advance. And when I look at the current donation funds raised, then everyone else feels the same.
So from my point of view I can now safely un-watch this thread since I do not expect anything to come out of it.

 

[Truemedia]

I would not have any problem to give away 100-200 Euos (like I allready proposed to an long time jFusion Developer) to an developer who:
- has build up some reputation/experience (i.e. allready created such bridges)
- approaches this task on a professional level (i.e. talk to XenForo staff first, then setup a page for this project with an outline of what is going to happen, etc.)

Since none of that is the case, I won't donate any money in advance. And when I look at the current donation funds raised, then everyone else feels the same.
So from my point of view I can now safely un-watch this thread since I do not expect anything to come out of it.

Your just ignorant, Iv'e already filled the info on that. If you were really keeping track of this you would of read those details at the beggining of the topic.

 

[Awesome-o]

so this is dead... at least via this path?

 

[hescominsoon]

You have one problem Truemedia : License

You are releasing this under Open source ? MIT ? commercial ?
You are trying to pass a "commercial" license under an open source guise. That's wrong.

If it's a commercial license then show us the product, if we agree to your terms then we will buy and even help you sell (if it's a good quality code)
if it's open source then don't even mention money
So make up your mind on the license and follow its rules.
Does that make sense to you ?

opensource does NOT mean free. It means open source. Folks get the two confused but they are NOT the same thing.

 

[FredC]

Im glad i didnt throw away my money once again.. Funny had you built this you would have had your $500.00 plus by now.

 

[Blandt]

opensource does NOT mean free. It means open source. Folks get the two confused but they are NOT the same thing.

No .. Open source means free
You cannot take the code and do as you please like MIT license ... but Open source = free $$

ok haha I might be wrong .. but would you please point to us a paying Open source Software ?

 

[Truemedia]

No this is very much alive and I infact have some news. http://www.jfusion.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=57&t=6688 as you can see im just finding time to make prestashop plugin available in jfusion 1.6 then straight to other deving

My plans of using phpbb my own forum have changed due to a lot of code clashes with elgg from using existing integrations on them both and im very interested in using xenforo so I will now be making this plugin regardless.

It will take longer since my paid work will still take priorty of my time, but I will release this plugin as commercially aswell until further notice (open source still but only free if I make enough money to of covered my costs and future support). Awesomo you will have free license for it if I can keep the xenforo license for my own site and testing

Also I will release posts on my blog and here (www.mediacityonline.net/news).

 

[Truemedia]

The cost would work like xenforo (open source software + paid license).

 

[hescominsoon]

No .. Open source means free
You cannot take the code and do as you please like MIT license ... but Open source = free $$

ok haha I might be wrong .. but would you please point to us a paying Open source Software ?

You are wrong. The BSD license is open source and you ARE allowed to close the source and charge for it. The GPL is the main license that tries to make all code free by restricting what you can do with it. opensource is not free..open source is source code that is openly re viewable...it is not automatically free.

 

[Blandt]

You are wrong. ...it is not automatically free.

I agree but I just want to find an open source software that we have to pay for in $$ ... that defeats the purpose of having open source, don't you think ?

 

[Truemedia]

Feel free to comment, but dont throw the money opinions at me. Im sick of hearing it

 

[hescominsoon]

I agree but I just want to find an open source software that we have to pay for in $$ ... that defeats the purpose of having open source, don't you think ?

no. XF is opensource. You are free to look at the code but to use it you have to give $$$. Open source is not automatically free. The big draw about open source is you have access to the source code itself...so you can review it yourself if you so choose. Just because it's open source doesn't mean it's free...don't continue to confuse the two..

 

[Blandt]

Feel free to comment, but dont throw the money opinions at me. Im sick of hearing it

I think the same can be said about you

But here I have a beta integration with Concrete 5 ... it's not ready yet .. but here I am giving it away Open Source for everyone to help me finish it :

I will of course start a thread for this integration when it's done ...

1: upload directories inside `upload` into your C5 root (merge them all).

2: You will have to configure it by editing the file at :

/c5/root/packages/xenforo/models/xenforo.php

Change the value of $path and $baseUrl properties to match your test environment.

 

[Truemedia]

Nice 1 lol, but i just had to get that comment out anyway to avoid the skeptics.

 

[Jason]

no. XF is opensource. You are free to look at the code but to use it you have to give $$$. Open source is not automatically free. The big draw about open source is you have access to the source code itself...so you can review it yourself if you so choose. Just because it's open source doesn't mean it's free...don't continue to confuse the two..

The widely accepted definition of open source software is software whose code is published and made available to the public, allowing anyone to copy, modify and redistribute the source code without having to pay any royalties or fees. XenForo may have an open source culture (e.g., outside developers are encouraged to build on top of the 'framework' and share their work (i.e., add-ons, themes)), but I would not consider it open source software as it does not follow an open source license. There's nothing wrong with that either.

Yes, there is a difference between open source and free software, but it has little do with the actual cost of the software itself.

 

[Anthony Parsons]

The Open Source Definition is used by the Open Source Initiative to determine whether or not a software license can be considered open source.

Introduction
Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code.
The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:
1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.
3. Derived Works
The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software.
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
The license may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the license allows the distribution of "patch files" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The license may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor.
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.
7. Distribution of License
The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional license by those parties.
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the program's license, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.
9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
The license must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the license must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.
10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface.

I believe the issue between stems due to open source definition and open source software license. Open source software is different to open source software license.