26 Reply by Utchin (edited by Utchin 2008-06-18 09:52)

  • Utchin
  • PunBB senior member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2007-02-09
  • Posts: 760

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Ledo wrote:

A least you are honest and admit your team doesn't develope enything but it will copy FluxBB and be dependant on developement of FluxBB.

I hope you will give credits to them in the bottom? Something like Powerd by PunBB - Developed by FluxBB...

Their is nothing wrong with what punbb are doing at the moment. They could of said to the fluxbb developers that their going to use bits of their code.

Think of it this way, as i can see your a bit thick!

You make a bit of code ( in this case, fluxbb)

Punbb users use it (punbb forum)

You don't expect them to put all sorts of notices on their forum do you?

Vovochka wrote:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
PunBB breaks 5.a because all FluxBB copyrights are removed.


Smartys is going to speak to them about this.

Sorry. Unactive due to personal life.

27 Reply by Ledo

  • Ledo
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2008-05-06
  • Posts: 13

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

If they copy they should give credit. That is yust my opinion an nothing else.

The credit should go to team that developes.

28 Reply by Ledo

  • Ledo
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2008-05-06
  • Posts: 13

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Why don't you develope on your own ideas and vision what PunBB should be?

Why not compete with FluxBB? Why copy?

29 Reply by Utchin

  • Utchin
  • PunBB senior member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2007-02-09
  • Posts: 760

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

think of it as a cake! Your trying to make a cake...

You cant change the ingredients because that what is in the cake. that's what punbb and fluxbb are, the cake... But if you want make another cake, you change the ingredients, that's what punbb will do.

Their is a reason why fluxbb have made them modifications to the fluxbb code, and anatonly* See's this reason and thinks that punbb needs them changes as well.

* Using your name instead of punbb developers because i don't know if the other admins done any work.

Sorry. Unactive due to personal life.
  • From: Russia
  • Registered: 2007-12-13
  • Posts: 642

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Vovochka wrote:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
PunBB breaks 5.a because all FluxBB copyrights are removed.

Smartys wrote:

No matter what, if code based on FluxBB is used, then FluxBB's copyright statement has to be kept intact.

Yup. This will be done.
Sorry for oversight.

Carpe diem

Anatoly's Website

31 Reply by hcgtv

  • hcgtv
  • hcgtv
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • Registered: 2004-06-25
  • Posts: 1,991

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Ledo wrote:

I hope you will give credits to them in the bottom? Somethink like Powerd by PunBB - Developed by FluxBB...

You should then add - Paid for by SoftDeluxe.

PHPCrossRef . TXP Make . TXP Themes . TXP Tags . TXP Planet . We Love TXP

hcgtv's Website

32 Reply by Paul

  • Paul
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: Wales, UK.
  • Registered: 2003-08-13
  • Posts: 3,089

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

hcgtv wrote:
Ledo wrote:

I hope you will give credits to them in the bottom? Somethink like Powerd by PunBB - Developed by FluxBB...

You should then add - Paid for by SoftDeluxe.

And we would have to add "Powered by FluxBB which is based on PunBB (owned by SoftDeluxe)". And then they would have to change it to Powered by PunBB (owned by SoftDeluxe) - Using bits of FluxBB (which is based on PunBB (owned by SoftDeluxe))". I can see it all becoming rather childish and tiresome very quickly.

33 Reply by quaker

  • quaker
  • quaker
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: USA
  • Registered: 2006-02-22
  • Posts: 1,783

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

how about creating a credits page ... and give credit to people or company...

the credit page will pull from the db. so that people who design the mods or ext. can be listed?

that would be simple enough.. away to give back to the company and the people who design the ext or mods...

Q

My stuff or my style might sux, but atleast I'm willing to help when I can.
Don't be stupid and help ! We are the stupid one's !!!

quaker's Website

34 Reply by hcgtv

  • hcgtv
  • hcgtv
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • Registered: 2004-06-25
  • Posts: 1,991

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Paul wrote:

I can see it all becoming rather childish and tiresome very quickly.

Yes, you are right.

I think once 1.3 becomes stable, both projects will start to diverge. I for one would like to see a stable PunBB 1.3 hit the streets, I've been waiting for it for awhile now.

PHPCrossRef . TXP Make . TXP Themes . TXP Tags . TXP Planet . We Love TXP

hcgtv's Website

35 Reply by sirena

  • sirena
  • sirena
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-04-06
  • Posts: 473

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Hmm. Is it time to bite the bullet and just un-fork? smile

36 Reply by hcgtv

  • hcgtv
  • hcgtv
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • Registered: 2004-06-25
  • Posts: 1,991

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

sirena wrote:

Hmm. Is it time to bite the bullet and just un-fork? smile

Maybe if we get punbb.org back wink

PHPCrossRef . TXP Make . TXP Themes . TXP Tags . TXP Planet . We Love TXP

hcgtv's Website

37 Reply by Ledo (edited by Ledo 2008-06-18 16:34)

  • Ledo
  • Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2008-05-06
  • Posts: 13

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

If developers of FluxBB don't mind copy-paste who am i then to be childish.

38 Reply by quaker

  • quaker
  • quaker
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: USA
  • Registered: 2006-02-22
  • Posts: 1,783

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

can i hear we get punbb.org back?

2 votes for that... amen bro.....

Q

My stuff or my style might sux, but atleast I'm willing to help when I can.
Don't be stupid and help ! We are the stupid one's !!!

quaker's Website

  • Registered: 2006-05-04
  • Posts: 326

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

I vote for punbb.org big_smile

PunBB, the FluxBB of tomorrow - today!

40 Reply by MattF

  • MattF
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: South Yorkshire, England
  • Registered: 2007-03-15
  • Posts: 1,956

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Don't you lot think that should be down to the devs themselves?

Besides, in my personal opinion, PunBB has now lost a lot of it's original intent & meaning.

MattF's Website

  • Registered: 2006-09-12
  • Posts: 36

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

I don't think that FluxBB will unfork/join PunBB until PunBB is independent of Informer again. I am very interested in the future of PunBB and the changes Anatoly announced - up to now PunBB 1.3 RC is simply the code of FluxBB with some copyright infringements.

42 Reply by quaker (edited by quaker 2008-06-19 03:43)

  • quaker
  • quaker
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: USA
  • Registered: 2006-02-22
  • Posts: 1,783

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

can we not all get along? just simple call it punflu...hehe....


Q

My stuff or my style might sux, but atleast I'm willing to help when I can.
Don't be stupid and help ! We are the stupid one's !!!

quaker's Website

  • Registered: 2007-03-15
  • Posts: 31

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

as for me, let punbb differ from fluxbb. cloning hasn't meaning.

DigitalOcean: VPS from $5/mon. Get $10 bonus!.

44 Reply by I-MAN

  • Registered: 2008-06-16
  • Posts: 12

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

For Me, i like Fluxbb Name, and since all devs are there, there is nothing bitter then orignal idea.

i like Fluxbb Name because it has its meaning. i.e Fast, Light, User Friendly, eXtensible Bulletin Board.

45 Reply by qie

  • qie
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2006-08-26
  • Posts: 185

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

just don't know the better than 1.2....

石家庄电脑维修

qie's Website

46 Reply by MattF

  • MattF
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: South Yorkshire, England
  • Registered: 2007-03-15
  • Posts: 1,956

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Anatoly wrote:
Vovochka wrote:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html
PunBB breaks 5.a because all FluxBB copyrights are removed.

Smartys wrote:

No matter what, if code based on FluxBB is used, then FluxBB's copyright statement has to be kept intact.

Yup. This will be done.

When? The RC download still has the copyright violation, judging by the quick look I just had.

MattF's Website

  • From: Sweden
  • Registered: 2005-09-30
  • Posts: 229

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

If this is a Release Candidat when will the real/final version be released?

hej!

FredrikK's Website

  • Registered: 2006-09-12
  • Posts: 36

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Fredrikk, feel free to take a look at the FluxBB timeline. You can be sure that SoftDeluxe doesn't need more than 2 days to "maximize portability" again wink

  • From: Russia
  • Registered: 2007-12-13
  • Posts: 642

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

MattF wrote:
Anatoly wrote:

Yup. This will be done.

When? The RC download still has the copyright violation, judging by the quick look I just had.

It doesn't seem to us a good idea to modify already openly released version.
We'll open SVN access to current development version and you will see the changes then.
And of course proper copyright notices will be present in next public version.

FredrikK wrote:

If this is a Release Candidat when will the real/final version be released?

As soon as we mean core stable enough. No deadline for now.

damaxxed wrote:

Fredrikk, feel free to take a look at the FluxBB timeline. You can be sure that SoftDeluxe doesn't need more than 2 days to "maximize portability" again wink

I'd ask you to edit or remove your message (I'll edit mine then) for obvious reasons. We are starting to clean up all offensive messages.
Though yes, we will possibly wait some reasonable time for FluxBB beta3 "feature freeze" to have cores sompatible. That is both users` and developers` interest.

Carpe diem

Anatoly's Website

50 Reply by MattF

  • MattF
  • Senior Member
  • Offline
  • From: South Yorkshire, England
  • Registered: 2007-03-15
  • Posts: 1,956

Re: PunBB 1.3 RC

Anatoly wrote:
MattF wrote:
Anatoly wrote:

Yup. This will be done.

When? The RC download still has the copyright violation, judging by the quick look I just had.

It doesn't seem to us a good idea to modify already openly released version.

To be honest, it doesn't matter a monkeys what your companies opinion is on this matter. You are directly violating a copyright. That is not a matter you address at your convenience or when you see fit. Plus, there is no valid technical reason not to update that source with a valid copyright. It would neither directly nor indirectly affect anything.

MattF's Website