Reasons why FreeNuke may be a bad idea

Nuke Cadet Joined: Jun 03, 2003 Posts: 2

There are a number of reasons why FreeNuke was a bad idea...here's the first:

If you have not done so yet check out this post:
http://www.nukecops.com/postt766.html

I am not going to go into GPL or any of that stuff. In that regard just know that there is room in GPL to enable developers to charge for distributions and even charge for software:
RedHat does it
Sendmail does it
MySQL does it
And FB should do it
And NukeCops should do it too.

I for one would be happy to see one version of Nuke with two distriutions a commercial version and a light version - the light version being free ware and the commercial version having a distribution fee. But what is important is that both be based on the same core platform so you can migrate to the commercial version.

First a practical point of view. The $10/month that FB charges, or that NukeCops should charge as well is not going to make or break anyone's piggy bank. Most who will read this spend more than that a month for coffee, cigarettes, beer, strippers, whatever... name your thing.

Industry imperative. FB's intial development and the contributions by so many including NukeCops has made this a platform to contend with and as such it needs to be supported. Why beg for donations? I for one am not interested in placing the future of this platform on the business model of a beggar.

Resource point of view. NukeCops seems to have some talent. I messed around with phpBB and was surprised to find that NukeCops contributed to the port to Nuke... not bad gentlement (and ladies if there are any in your bunch). But I ask you this... why waste that talent on recreating the wheel? Why not put your talents to better use.

The commercial version of nuke still lacks some things...
An EDI transaction clearing system.
Intergration of the nuke user directory module with LDAP.
Payment Processing.
Making it Web Services aware so an order system can send a zip code of origin and zip code of destination to the FedEX web server and give me a realtime shipping quote.
Digital product distribution features
Any of these are things that you would better spend your resources on because the do not exist.

Major Joined: Jan 13, 2003 Posts: 892

You seem to highlighted some of the best reasons for cleaning house there. In general what your looking for won't happen under phpnuke as is. We don't control the core. One man does and he hasn't shown much interest in that and frankly neither have any of the other big CMS systems that I've seen in the OpenSource community. There are a few there is hope out there but...

As always stay tuned...

Lieutenant Joined: May 29, 2003 Posts: 231

Quote:

I am not going to go into GPL or any of that stuff.

Is it because you don't really understand the different licenses? What you posted was wrong.
-- Redhat is not GPL: http://www.redhat.com/licenses/rhl_standard_us.html .
-- MySQL offers a GPL version which is completely free to users. They also offer a commercial non-GPL license which is the one they charge a license fee. http://www.mysql.com/products/licensing.html
-- Sendmail has a free version and commercial verison both of which have non-GPL licenses. The commercial version is the one they charge a license fee. You can download the software to see their licenses.

None of your three company examples charge for GPL software. Regardless of your lack of supporting cases, I do agree the developers are entitled to make some money to help support themselves/families as well as the project. I agree with sixone though FB is not the right person to carry out a plan like you presented. To successfully do this, requires someone who has fresh innovative ideas and knows how to deal with people.

Joined: Jan 31, 2004 Posts: -88

you all should really read around

The Linux kernal is GPL, therefore there has to be free distributions of all the linux makes.

Red Hat DOES NOT charge for linux. It charges for support and extra commercial software it provides, but linux itself is FREE.

same with sendmail.

Red Hat's standard version IS GNU/GPL according to the licence documentation that ships with Red Hat linux

Why should we charge for a CMS that the whole reason I came up with the idea for in the first place was to provide a FREE CMS because FB was essentially charging for his.

AI

Lieutenant Joined: May 29, 2003 Posts: 231

ArtificialIntel wrote:

you all should really read around

Aaah, you are the one who needs to do some reading. Red Hat does indeed sell a commercial license for the Linux software itself. They also charge for support and extra software. Their standard verison is not GPL. I even posted a reference link right from their own site. Both versions of Sendmail are not GPL. Download them and read.

You don't have to charge anything for a CMS if you don't want to. It's your decision if you want to absorb all the expenses and not be compensated for your time.

Nuke Soldier Joined: Jun 02, 2003 Posts: 13

I think we need a FreeNuke now. IMO we needed it for a long time, but now it is obvious.

I have nothing against the idea to get some money for the development of PN. I also spent 4 ways the 10 bucks for clubbing.

But I definetly disagree the idea to put the security updates on the club. That is pure nonsense.

If FB continues to do that and if there will be no FreeNuke, I will use another system.

Also I dont like it that FB tries to do it all on his own, and does not manage to make a really nice system. I think on PN there are missing the ideas of a team. It is a very good system, but, to tell the truth, it is not a perfect system, it is FBs idea of a nice system.

So, I think everything is pushing someone to make a freenuke system.

And, please, use different name. Cool

Once again, excuse me for my funny english.

Joined: Jan 31, 2004 Posts: 0

AI's no longer here, but as somebody who also runs a server using Red Hat 9 and have done so since RH9 was released, I can assure you that Red Hat linux itself IS GNU/GPL - hell, read the documentation that comes with it.

The commercial licence version of Red Hat is only commercial because it has extra commercially available software with it that isn't released under the GNU/GPL or Freeware licences

FreeNuke, if it goes ahead, will probably not be under that name from what AI's said.

CO

Lieutenant Joined: May 28, 2003 Posts: 203

I think free nuke or what ever you call it should go ahead, and im all for open sorce software Laughing

I run red hat linux and yes it is free some people just dont read. Mad

A team will make it much better that one person can. more ideas. Nuke Cops is the best support site around for nuke, they came up with all patches not FB and charge for security updates.

Posted: Thu Jun 05, 2003 5:45 pm

lofasz, I like some of the idea's you have for the site. Especially LDAP compatibility and Web Services awareness.

From what I understand of both technologies, couldn't code be written to interact with these services without having to change the nukie code itself? Something similar in concept to the way php can communicate with different DB's just by using a different driver (of sorts).

An I comopletely off the mark or did I at least graze it as far as how your idea's might be able to be included?