next »

[dwj]

5$ are not that much even more for euro ppl like me. 

The only thing is that when u ask for a charge u have to provide ur best.

For example i've customized spartan theme, and i've found it's kinda messy to understand... if it's 4 free i won't mind, but if i have to pay for it...

Just keep that in mind , then i understand ur point.

[FatherShawn]

We're happy to subscribe and sorry we didn't donate before!

The only thing is that when u ask for a charge u have to provide ur best.

dwj does make a good point - expectations rise when there's a fee.

[V-man]

Yes, a complete re-write of the template system is in the works. Spartan will be included in the next version, so a separate download won't be required. RE quality, the JCal project has improved so much since we started, but it's not a commercial application. The development process remains unchanged. Unfortunately, with so much to do, themes have become a lower priority at the moment.

[tpintsch]

The GPL does not require you to provide the entire package, simply the source code, but you must provide it, and you must provide an option to get it for free, or someone might send an anonymous e-mail to the Free Software Foundation.

You don't have to associate your entire release package with the GPL, and quite frankly, restricting access to it is the most legally stupefied thing you could have done. but if you are going to put your software up on the extensions page of joomla under the GNU liscense you better provide the source code for free, otherwise you are looking at, among other things false advertising, violating the GPL, and a number of other community violations.

Let's look at this in detail... every Linux distribution has a "Free" version, why is this... because they want to be nice to the community? Nope. Its because they've taken up the cause of the GPL and after actually reading the thing (You have done that, haven't you?)

So, In conclusion I would offer my last (free) version) as free, let it be that, state that that portion of the code is opensource, that the modifications going forward from the point are not. Start charging for those, and you will find quite a few more takers and find yourself on far safer legal ground (Given that, you've kinda based this stuff on the GPL, you kinda have a responsability to provide your codebase free of charge.)

Thanks,

tim.

I was really interested in using your software, and honestly, in my mind its worth more then $5. But violating my principals is not worth what any of your software is truly worth.

tim.

[V-man]

As stated in the announcement, the source code is published at joomlacode.org:

http://dev.anything-digital.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,71/topic,1365.0/

As such, I don't think you have to violate your principles

[styxx]

For me I have no objections to the annual fee - I have donated before and intended to again so the fee simply formalises that.

Though it may have reduced revenue short term I do think it may have gained you more friends if you had put up an announcement giving a "notice period" though (in x days we will move to new not for free download model...)

I do see a potential issue with the "one download" fee if there was ever a release with a major bug I think customers would feel ripped off if they have to pay a further fee to download a fixed working copy.

But bottom line I think its well worth the money to keep this excelent product in development.... especially if you add the ability to set events recurring "every 2nd monday" etc. I know this is on the to do list, do you have any rough idea of when this will be implimented because for me this lack is the only downside to your superb product.
 

[V-man]

Thanks for the note. The feature request you mention is done and is now being tested. Hopefully we have a public beat in a few weeks.

[jmc]

@tpintsch:
I never read such a load of complete bollocks in all my born days.
Does the concept of "fee-for-download" not actually register? Were I of a mind to do so, I could charge anyone on the planet as much money as I wished to charge in order to allow them to use my servers to download any GPL (or GPL-derivative) package. The FSF would have nothing to say on the matter. The GPL bars me from charging you for the software, NOT for the access to it, or my services thereafter.
So, In conclusion (sic), I suggest you worry more about violating the facts and less about violating your principals. 

[Edited by moderator]

[twoten]

I run a free site and had Extcal installed. I was glad to see the development was taken over by JCalPro, I converted the calendar to JCalPro and removed Extcal from the site only within the last month.
I have found a few bugs in JCalPro one of which, the search results break the template, so have posted this in the forum, no solution as yet. Now...JCalpro are charging for any further updates, this sucks, if I want to upgrade to sort out any bugs that I have inherited from the upgrade I now have to pay. If this had been realised before then at least I would have had a choice, as it stands I have no choice but to either pay to rectify the bugs, put up with it.
I have no problem with developers charging for their components, the user has the choice, accept the charge and use the software or look for an alternative as many do; but to start charging for a free component mid development is forcing users hands and not appreciated!

[V-man]

Thanks for your comment twoten. I appreciate your position which is regrettable. However, JCal Pro was getting almost no financial support from the community, and changed to the model as described in this tread and elsewhere on the site. If JCal Pro development had stopped all together, your options would be even more limited than they are now. As it stands, you can upgrade for just $5. Think of the value of that $5 compared to all the hours you spent developing your free site. I think $5 will seem pretty small by then.

$5 is quite small when I think of all the hours I spent developing this site alone, let alone JCal Pro and monitoring the forums.

In light of this, I hope you understand our decision and continue to use JCal Pro.

Can I ask if you donated to the project when you first decided to use JCal Pro?

Edit: grammar.

[twoten]

Can I ask if you donated to the project when you first decided to use JCal Pro?

I have to admit I didn't in this case.

I have contributed to components in the past as I use them on commercial sites as I have gained from there use.

I appreciate the position your in and admit $5 is a reasonable fee but as already mentioned in this forum what happens a couple of weeks later when a further upgrade to correct bugs in the previous $5 download is available? OK there is the $25 option which again isn't exorbitant but if this is contributed to all the component/module developers who's code you're using it can soon add up.

[SAH]

Hey, I don’t mind paying 5 bucks, not even $15, but I’m not sure I like the way it was presented.  Surly you guys know that J cal and your URL is featured in the brand new book “Beginning Joomla, from novice to professional”. I just assumed you were charging money to take advantage of the advertising plug. I would do the same thing if my component was featured in a major national book release.  Anyway, it wasn’t 5 bucks, my CC was charged for $6.50.  Are you aware of this, or did I miss some extra fee somewhere??

[V-man]

I have never heard of this book to be totally honest. When was it released?

There is a $1.50 subscription fee for 2Checkout orders as we state on the order page (see 'Note 2').

[SAH]

Beginning Joomla, From Novice to Professional -by Dan Rahmel
Just released last week.

Jcal is the authors favorite calendar – a  few screenshots to.

[V-man]

Well, I sure appreciate the referral from the author, but i had no idea this book was in preparation or production. Download fees for JCal Pro began on July 17.