Forum Subject: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/09/08 12:19pm
By: Anonymous (guest)

I know personally you're fine if this line is not included, but I was just wondering if it's legally possible (regarding the GNU GPL license). I don't want to do it, just want to know if I can tell my own clients it's not possible. Thanks!

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/09/08 01:18pm
By: jmucchiello

There is nothing in the GPL that compels you to include or not include the "powered by Geeklog" text on a site you create.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/09/08 03:53pm
By: Anonymous (guest)

Is it at least encouraged or just not mentioned at all?

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/09/08 04:05pm
By: Dirk

Actually, most of the GPL is about distribution - which doesn't happen when you simply run Geeklog on a site. So, no, it doesn't really say anything about having to mention the program's name when you're running it (you can check for yourself[*1] , it really isn't that long).

bye, Dirk

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/09/08 07:14pm
By: Anonymous (guest)

So when I install Geeklog for a client, what's the bottom line about any limits I should ask them to follow?

BTW, aren't you moving to GPL v3?

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/11/08 01:41pm
By: HughJohnson

You don't need to include any link to Geeklog or anything. Although you might want to, just to be nice. I have some clients who wouldn't let me put the words "Geeklog" on their site because to them the name is lame. I truly wish it was called something else.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 08:07am
By: 1000ideen

That is a good point, that the name is lame

It is even lamer in other languages like German. At first glance you don`t even know how to pronounce it. G-klog like the well known brands G-star or G-shock? You`d never say geek-log although the word geek probably derives from the German Jeck or Geck which is now more a local word for carnival-goer.

Anyway on a professional site I`d never keep any link to geeklog nor myself. What you can do is to write an invisible notice in the header like Typo3 does.

~~~~
http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewUnsolvedquery.php?idThread=297284&idForum=2&lp=ende&lang=de#viewunsolvedquery[*2]
"The term "geek" originally referred to the carnival performers... "

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 08:27am
By: 1000ideen

Actually, why not thinking about that a little more? What would be a good international name for geeklog? Any ideas?

gCMS
G-Portal
...

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 11:44am
By: HughJohnson

I personally don't dislike the name, but if it was called something like 'GL-CMS' it would be better. Even if the official name was still Geeklog.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 02:48pm
By: 1000ideen

That`s even one more idea I`d fully agree with a solution like that.

Personally I don`t have a feeling for the meaning of "geek" in English. Reading the discussion of the translators it is rather something strange and not necessarily positive like "power CMS", "professional CMS" or so.

I`d also like to know what problems there are in other languages.

The version number is also much too low to look mature it should raise to 3 with the next release. Drupal is at version 4.7.11 and 5.6, offering a 6rc2 and planing on version 7. Geeklog is creeping around 1.5! It is just the looks of course but that is important for a first contact. :pray:

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 03:35pm
By: LWC

Have you ever heard of a program with v20 or v100? Because that's where Drupal is headed according to what you say. Personally, v20 would look much more weirder than v1.5 to me.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 04:41pm
By: 1000ideen

I said version 3 not 7 and not 20. Drupal is indeed a bit skyrocketing

There are many examples for Software with a version reaching higher numbers like corel draw 11, freehand 11, illustrator 12. All these programmes try to make the appearance that non is further advanced than the other. Whereas when you see inkscape 0.45.1 you may think it is a pre 1 version.

Mambo is at 4.5#, Typo3 at 4.1.5. It would e suitable for Geeklog to go for 3.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/12/08 07:17pm
By: drafty

Are we getting physcotic here?? What the hell does the version number matter ? If your client wants to use Drupal (or whatever else) ........... and you can't convince them of the benefits of Geeklog (god forbid the NAME !!!!) - and they won't listen, ............. this is entirely between you and them of you. Not that they need need to know what you are using anyway,unless you tell them. Lets forget all about security, ease of use, support, etc; ............... the VERSION number is all important !!! How about we change the version number to 5 ?? Get real - GL is what it is, if you don't like it, be stupid - go elsewhere Hey, guess I'm biased :banana:

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/13/08 07:03am
By: LWC

True, but if you put a link in the footer out of common courtesy, then you do risk them seeing the name.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/13/08 11:20am
By: drafty

That's very true. I do agree with some of the comments in this thread - I've also had clients who don't want to display the name. However, even without a name change, it's possible to make a graphic link with something like 'GL-CMS;

As for version numbers - I gravitated to GL after using Xoops, Joomla, Drupal, PostNuke, and a couple of others. None of them fully fulfilled my needs, and I got sick to death of the security issues I had. If we want to compare it with software, how often does a higher version number just mean more 'bloat'?

And also, very importantly - none of the others offered the same (high) standards of support that GL users enjoy........and appreciate.

Maybe GL would benefit from a change of name ??? Something for the core team to ponder ??

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 01/13/08 12:30pm
By: ronack

Most if not all Geeks are proud to be Geeks. Just don't call us NERDS!!! Now if it was called Nerdlog then it would be a problem and I would suggest changing the name ASAP.

Bottom line is this, I'm sure you can put "Powered by GL" at the bottom if you want and you don't have to include the version unless you want too. It's what's inside that matters. Geeklog is on every PHP page and that's what matters.

I think the initials GL has been very widely used since the early years. As for the version number, I think a low number just tells everyone how well written GL is and that's what you can tell your clients.

It seems to me that the GL writers pay better attention to the way that version number go. That first number being a major rewrite, second being a major modification and the third being a minor modification. etc.

Correct me if I'm wrong!

Thanks

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/22/08 01:03pm
By: Anonymous (guest)

You've never answered that one (and will it affect the "powered by Geeklog" question?).

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/22/08 02:20pm
By: Dirk

There is no need or immediate benefit for us to switch to the GPL v3 now. This may change some day, when we want to integrate some code that's under that license or one that's compatible with it (for example, the Apache license is compatible with GPL v3 but not with v2).

We discussed this briefly[*3] back when v3 came out.

And I don't think it would affect the use of the "powered by Geeklog". I haven't read v3 in that detail yet, but I doubt they would introduce such a clause, given that this was one of the FSF's main criticisms about the BSD license (back in the day when it had an "advertising clause" ).

bye, Dirk

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/23/08 06:36am
By: ronsteenvoorden

Sounds good 1000ideen, but what about GL-BlogPortal? Then again In the end it's the quality of the software that matters most and the Geeklog programmers have done an impressive job so far!

And I'm proud to have a link to geeklog from my blog

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/23/08 08:57am
By: Anonymous (guest)

Thanks for the link! That's exactly the conversation I wanted to have here. I thought the mailing list was just for security and the forum is for everything else. I now realize you have mailing lists about many other things except security.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/23/08 05:20pm
By: 1000ideen

"IN THE END" this is the problem! Go to a place like http://www.opensourcecms.com/ and there you are at the BEGINNING! Currently I count 50 CMS being listed. Let's imagine you want to look at 5 quality CMS more closely which ones would that be?
The ones with a "lame", funny, childish name, the ones with a low number? A CMS that is called 'blog'?

Why do you think a certain glue was named Loctite? The market is full of CMS (and glue) and if you don`t pay attention to the name and version number you are loosing potential user every minute to the 49 other competitors.

So any suggestions are welcome also G-blog-CMS or whatever ideas come up.

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/24/08 11:56am
By: geiss

Your blog[*4] looks great! Ever though about releasing your theme to the Geeklog community?

Thx!

Eric

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/24/08 01:37pm
By: ronsteenvoorden

Hi Eric, thanks for your kind words, much appreciated

I actually use the standard Refresh-f template, added a drop down menu and made some small modifications. The biggest change to the theme was incorporating the menu, which worked out fine

If you like I can give some more info about the menu I used, I'd be happy to share that with others!

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/24/08 03:32pm
By: geiss

I thought it looked familiar! :wink: Not to get this thread off topic, but please feel free to share your menu code either in the forum here at geeklog.net or over at gl Labs[*5] . We're getting ready to work on another Chameleon release, and could use help from folks like yourself. :shakehands:

Thx!

Eric

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/24/08 06:57pm
By: Anonymous (drafty)

I agree ........this blog would make a great theme, and would love to see it available to the community - trouble is, it's so damn good, that it takes your mind of the subject of this thread !!! Well done, ronsteenvoorden - not only a very good GL theme, but very interesting subject matter as well :wink:

Getting back to the subject ........... if we must have a change of name, what about GL-BCMS .......... or GLB-CMS (this would cover some peoples conception of the blog aspect as well) .............. or what about a complete change to something like 'ULTIMATE CMS' or 'Primus inter Pares' (first amongst equals) ........ a few thoughts for discussion ;-))))
Dave

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 02/24/08 11:01pm
By: samstone

I feel like an old timer on the site! Over the years I have learned by reading the developers conversations that GL has no intention to compete with other CMS or Blogs. It's just a place to share their coding hobby. The summary is "Geeklog is for the geeks."

None of these contributors wants to spoil the fun by worrying about what other people think out there. This is a CMS with an attitude! If you like it great, if you don't, life goes on! That kind of thing. No anxiety is welcome.

A for the name. I like it. But a rose in any other name will smell as geek!

Just my two cents.

Sam

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 04/19/10 05:18am
By: LWC

FYI, GPLv3 has an official way to include attribution, but that's not relevant unless Geeklog moves to it.

With that aside, here's a shocking revelation - PHP-Nuke have been claiming for years the GPLv2 situation is fixed by renaming "powered by" to "copyright by":
http://phpnuke.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4947[*6] (note it continues in a follow up link).

Let me sum up: GPLv2's section 2(c) dictates interactive copyright notices must remain. Not liking attribution, GPL obviously meant for these notices to just mention the GPL license. But an official from GNU assured (not legally, just conceptually) the developer of PHP-Nuke there's no reason not to include the actual word "copyright" as well (e.g. "copyright by Geeklog, this is a GPL software...", etc.). The official was aware it's a web app and not a binary, but he also consulted with another official.

The link claims the ticket they opened in GNU's tracker is listed in GNU's archive. I found no such feature as "archive" in GNU's site. Nevertheless, it seems so simple I'm surprised it has no mass usage in web apps.

So what do you think? Note most of the follow up link is the developer defending himself against censoring masses of users who wanted to punch him for finding this fix (after they got used to casually manually removing the attribution of PHP-Nuke).

Re: GPL and "powered by Geeklog"

Posted on: 04/19/10 05:36am
By: 1000ideen

I`d not use a CMS where the copyright is visible to the outside. That was the reason why I did not use Postnuke or so in 2003 but used GL.

I suggested before to do it like Typo3, they simply have it as comment in the header. Look at the source code of this site: http://typo3.org/about/sites-made-with-typo3/[*7]