Jump to content

Welcome, Guest!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Traumflug

Merchant's Edition v1.9.2

Recommended Posts

A new version of Merchant's Edition was just released:

Github

Merchant’s Edition wishes you good business.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice! I saw that you implemented thirtybees's bug fixes etc. Do bug fixes also go from Merchant's to thirtybees?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 30knees said:

Do bug fixes also go from Merchant's to thirtybees?

No. That would be too big of a hassle. I believe that we can't just cherry-pick single commit, because that would violate license agreement. We would have to also copy all copyrights and attributions that @Traumflug added to the original thirty bees files (thus transforming them to Merchant Edition). Thirty bees source code would actually become derivate work of ME. That's just silly to me.

Merchant edition can cherry-pick our changes, because this fork is already derivate work of thirty bees, and because we mostly didn't change copyrights notices in the header files. Once we add a new copyright notices, or other attributions, to the source code, he will have to copy these as well together with the cherry-pick, even if the commit itself don't contain these notices. He would be breaking the license agreement otherwise. 

Traumflug has decided to run his own spin-off of thirty bees, as anybody is entitled to do so. I'm not happy about it, but what can I do. We will, however, not allow him to advertise his fork on our servers anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, datakick said:

That would be too big of a hassle. I believe that we can't just cherry-pick single commit, because that would violate license agreement.

Uhm. You could just pick them and be happy. Every commit mentions the author in its description, license problem solved. Merchant's Edition takes care to keep this authorship while picking, thirty bees can certainly do the same.

Copying code from one open source project to another under compatible licenses is perfectly legal and often exercised practice.

If such practice makes you grumpy you might want to remember where you base your own work on. thirty bees inherits tens of thousands of lines of code from PrestaShop. Tens of thousands of lines of code in vendor/. Thousands of lines of code written by Michael Dekker and, well, me. Half of the recent bugfixing work was donated by users. You got all this for free.

Open source projects don't distinguish by ownership. Open source projects distinguish by distributed feature set, by target audience, by secondary services.

Edited by Traumflug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, I don't understand the technical intricacies about introducing code from each fork. Independent of that, I feel cooperation would be better (assuming Traumflug doesn't want to contribute to thirtybees (and Merchant's Edition) and earn his money as an established partner and contributor).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Traumflug said:

Uhm. You could just pick them and be happy. Every commit mentions the author in its description, license problem solved. Merchant's Edition takes care to keep this authorship while picking, thirty bees can certainly do the same.

Copying code from one open source project to another under compatible licenses is perfectly legal and often exercised practice.

No, it's not that simple. The license give specific rights. You can't just open any open source code and copy this line or that method. It is intellectual property of the author, and using it without the consent is very much illegal. Being it an open source, author granted anyone rights to use the code, but also put a condition on the usage.

And in this case, OSL3.0 stipulates that anyone can use such code as long as they retain attribution:

Quote

6) Attribution Rights. You must retain, in the Source Code of any Derivative Works that You create, all copyright, patent, or trademark notices from the Source Code of the Original Work, as well as any notices of licensing and any descriptive text identified therein as an "Attribution Notice." You must cause the Source Code for any Derivative Works that You create to carry a prominent Attribution Notice reasonably calculated to inform recipients that You have modified the Original Work.

As far as I understand that, I can copy any part of the code, as long as I retain any all all copyrights notices in it. The question is the scope - if I copy 1 method from some file, do I need to copy all copyright notices in that file only, or do I need to copy attributions from all files? I don't know. But I definitely don't want this hassle. 

If thirty bees (and merchants edition) was released under MIT license or similar,, I would definitely have no problem cherry-picking code from Merchants Edition. But since it is released under OSL 3.0, it's definitely not that easy. 

 

11 hours ago, Traumflug said:

If such practice makes you grumpy you might want to remember where you base your own work on. thirty bees inherits tens of thousands of lines of code from PrestaShop. Tens of thousands of lines of code in vendor/. Thousands of lines of code written by Michael Dekker and, well, me. Half of the recent bugfixing work was donated by users. You got all this for free.

I don't know what you are trying to say here.

I don't pretend that we own the thirty bees code. We don't. It is an open source. I know it's a collection of contributions from lots of authors, and hopefully each contribution was valid under the license. 

The way I see it, standard contribution model is perfectly in line with licensing agreement. When somebody forks the thirty bees repository, they create derivate work. They implement the change, and create pull request.

  • If fork doesn't contain any new attributions (copyrights notices and such), then it's perfectly fine to merge such PR to the parent project. Because it already contains all copyrights that is present in fork. Similarly, it's perfectly valid to cherry-pick any code from the fork.
  • If the fork contains some copyrights that are not in the parent project, than it's fine to merge the PR as long as it contains all the new copyrights notices
  • If fork contains some new copyrights notices (as merchants edition fork does), and PR does not contain these, then merging such requests would be illegal under the OSL 3 license, and infringing on intellectual property of the author. The same applies for cherry-picking. It would be perfectly fine under the MIT license, though.

I understand that you love open source, and you probably hate all this legal nonsense. But the legal stuff exists and should be respected. 

Open source does not mean that anyone can do to whatever they want with the code. Everyone can do only what license allows them.

This is a good example of how important it is to choose proper license for a project. I'm really sad thirty bees is under OSL 3.0, but there's absolutely nothing I can do about it. Guys at prestashop decided that long time ago.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/13/2021 at 12:21 AM, 30knees said:

Unfortunately, I don't understand the technical intricacies about introducing code from each fork. Independent of that, I feel cooperation would be better (assuming Traumflug doesn't want to contribute to thirtybees (and Merchant's Edition) and earn his money as an established partner and contributor).

Well, you read it. All the commits were offered, which certainly counts as contribution. The response is no no no, and a lot of excuses.

At this point it's probably pointless to discuss this further. Merchants have to decide for them selfs whether they want a distribution coming with all known bug fixes or a distribution coming with only the bugfixing subset originating from thirty bees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Traumflug said:

Well, you read it. All the commits were offered, which certainly counts as contribution. The response is no no no, and a lot of excuses.

But what about commenting on the reason that the copyright notices you introduced apparently make the incorporation of your code illegal? Not infringing on your copyright (and perhaps messing up how thirtybees can be forked) does not sound like an excuse to me but a very wise decision.

Edited by 30knees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...