next »

[kirk837]

I don't mind the $5 at all (I generally contribute 4-5 times that to any component that's good enough to put on a live site).  I'll do that here, too, if this component turns out to be usable. 

BUT ... Why do you put us through the boring hell of separate downloads of all six parts of the package, each one requiring its own license agreement, each requiring we pay enough attention to pick an item we haven't already downloaded.... 

Why on earth don't you zip up all six pieces together???  I'm certain you'd save bandwidth -- the page loading has to use more bandwidth than the files themselves.

[V-man]

We like the individual downloads as it let's us track usage. However, the main reason is that a lot of users new to joomla (i.e. the majority of our users) don't realize that they have to extract a combined package first to get access to the installers.

[kirk837]

V-Man -- the two do not exclude one another!  You could have a unified package for those of us brilliant enough to look into the zip first, and separate downloads for those you think are too simple to handle a package.  (Really, your excuse was ludicrous and insulting.)

You don't in any way validate my (fact-based) complaint about the inconvenience and annoyance of having to mentally keep track of what's been downloaded already, and to click a license agreement for each.  This lack of acknowledgment parallels your lack of sensitivity in the way you introduced your $5 charge (which, as I said, I think is quite reasonable in itself). 

Maybe you should have your girlfriend/wife walk you through the basics of human interactions.  Your way is making a number of people unnecessarily angry, and endangers wide adoption of your (perhaps very nice) component. 

I hope that after testing I can post a positive review of JCal -- there aren't many good event calendars around. 

[jmc]

My, my... look what just crawled out from under the bridge...
Actually, kirk, the only "ludicrous and insulting" thing here was your last post. It seems to me to be a remarkably reactionary (and personally insulting) response to a reasoned and civil answer from the Dev.
Whilst I can appreciate that you claim to be "brilliant enough to look into the zip first", I feel sorry that you clearly didn't get the opportunity to do so. You have obviously suffered as a result of your straining to "mentally keep track of what's been downloaded already". Hence the tone of your post.
However, I'm sure all will be forgiven when you post your positive review of Jcal. It will make such a difference to the project.
And you're right (in at least this one point) - there aren't many good Calendars around.

[thepiston]

i never have a problem paying for software, but isn't this someone else's work?  Granted it's been upadted, but I've updated many components personally (although I never asked for anything in return).  Probably worth it, but kind of bummed so many people are asking for money on the Joomla project. Is Mohamed Moujami getting any of this money?

[V-man]

Almost everything in Joomla is based on someone else's work. JCal's roots are clearly stated, and mad props to all past developers and everyone on the forums who are generous enough to share there work.

I presume that past contributors have no interest in this project (financial or otherwise), since Extcal (as it was known back then as a stand-alone project and the Mambo port) was dead for about 2 years. I tried once to contact Mr. Moujami but there was no response (likely since many people were e-mailing him for bug fixes long after the project was abandoned).

The security release prepared by David McKinnis and his team at mamboguru was used for the initial JCal release and Dave is thrilled that we have continued on with development, and has no interest in the project. David and I communicate regularly.

In summary, we have attempted to contact or have contacted the previous developers out of professional courtesy. I say 'courtesy' because the GPL license does not require that we contact anyone or even make any changes to the software. It is perfectly legal to distribute GPL software (for free or for a fee) in the original or any modified form (within the terms of the GPL).

I won't re-hash the reasons and justification for the fee-based model, but will just say that there is no conspiracy or bad business practices at work here (I hope that didn't sound harsh, that was no my intention ).

[gwmbox]

I think generally most people are very happy to make a small contribution to get the scripts, I know I have for many and the same with this calendar component (but I am still waiting to be activated to allow me to download - that is the only negative but that is another story).

The only question I have is if a security release is needed.

If I purchase my one day subscription today and download the files (when subscription is activated) and all is good but over the next few days, weeks or months a security issue is identified with that version will the devs first contact those that have that version to let them know and also will they be able to download the fix at no charge or will we have to again buy a download?

Cheers

[V-man]

If your subscription is expired, you will have to re-purchase a subscription.

In the scenario you describe, an urgent security fix would be posted in the forums for all to use at no cost.

[wiking]

is there a svn tree with contains the current version of jcal pro (1.5.3).

at joomlacode there is only 1.5.2 in the tree. or is the project not longer under the gpl?

[V-man]

The repository at joomlacode should contain the latest stable release, though it's possible the XML file still says 1.5.2.

The project is still GPL.

[bukavu]

I really do not mind buying the software, I don't like free things anyway, my question is: cai i use one copy on 2 or 3 different websites?

[V-man]

See the terms, specifically "unlimited usage".

[gtait]

I'm amazed that so many people complain about the price of a tidy piece of software costing the same as 1 happy meal.  Many hours of development has obviously been spent here... these guys are doing you a favour giving it to you for such a bargain.

And subscription issues: backup your data.

[Lambas]

I dont think the terms are fair.

There should be a simple per/domain license.

Lets say i will buy a license now.
In some weeks (or days) the new version of joomla will be out so i may need
one more license to get the new version.

And lets say again that in the next JCal version will be a major bug that will come out after some days.

I will need a third license. And for Joomla 2.0 one more and it go like this ..

IT IS NOT THE 5 dols. Is about fair terms

[V-man]

If want to keep up with the latest version, I recommend
the 1 year subscription. If you only want to spend $5, then stick with the latest stable version.

In my opinion, this is quite fair and offers a range of options. It's simply a choice.