Gossamer Forum
Home : Gossamer Threads Inc. : Discussion :

CPAN release of GT lib (or modules)

Quote Reply
CPAN release of GT lib (or modules)
Answering a paragraph from this post in:
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/...i?post=274852#274852

Quote:
Quote:
It would also be nice to see some of your core modules released on CPAN. I think GT::Template is just awesome but I can't use it as often as I would like :) And I just can't find anything close to GT::SQL.
We don't have any plan to do this at the current time. One of the problems is that doing so would put us under a certain amount of pressure to support our modules to people other than our clients.

Well, I believe, that releasing some GT modules to the CPAN doesn't force GT to give free support for CPAN users. Why would give support for free? We all know, time is money.

GT could give paid support for the GT modules released on CPAN. Asking a $40-$50/hour support fee would also mean extra income for GT company... While existing clients would be still supported for free, according to the license rules.
New CPAN users would also refresh the forum a bit, meaning activity, self-help potential, and clients....

Also not to mention the extra advertisement, what a CPAN release would mean for GT.

As summary, by CPAN release GT would win: potential extra support income, free advertisement, additional users, more product sellings...


I really don't understand your hesitation...
Just my 2 cents...

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
As nice as it may be to have public distros, I personally don't think it's in their best interest. Not only would they be pressured to support the modules by non-clients, there's the potential of someone using their work to develope competing products.

If they were my modules I certainly wouldn't be happy if I spent countless hours writing modules that are essential to the workings of my programs, released them freely, then subsequently discovered third-party competing programs based entirely off my work.

Then you also have the legal costs to shut down said infringments... and the posibility that such disputes won't outcome in your favor.

a paid developers license that specificly outlined what can and cannot be done with them would be the only way to go. this way you also can keep track of who as legit access and such.

just my 2 cents ;-)

Philip
------------------
Limecat is not pleased.

Last edited by:

fuzzy logic: Mar 3, 2005, 7:31 AM
Quote Reply
Re: [fuzzy logic] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
Ditto =)

Cheres

Andy (mod)
andy@ultranerds.co.uk
Want to give me something back for my help? Please see my Amazon Wish List
GLinks ULTRA Package | GLinks ULTRA Package PRO
Links SQL Plugins | Website Design and SEO | UltraNerds | ULTRAGLobals Plugin | Pre-Made Template Sets | FREE GLinks Plugins!
Quote Reply
Re: [fuzzy logic] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
Quote:
As nice as it may be to have public distros, I personally don't think it's in their best interest. Not only would they be pressured to support the modules by non-clients, there's the potential of someone using their work to develope competing products.

If they were my modules I certainly wouldn't be happy if I spent countless hours writing modules that are essential to the workings of my programs, released them freely, then subsequently discovered third-party competing programs based entirely off my work.

Then likely you and Andy wasn't one of those developers, who submitted more thousand modules into CPAN... If those developers would have thinked like you (not to release any module to public), then currently we simply would not have any modules available in CPAN...

And if Larry Wall would not have been write Perl, and would not make it available for free, then we could not use GT products (which are based on Perl), because Perl would not be so popular language.

Anyway.
I do NOT suggest GT to give away their products for free. That's not my goal. I'm talking about some free GT lib modules (like GT::Template or GT::SQL), maybe the full GT lib (if Alex is convinced, that this would be useful).
Even if the full GT lib would be available for free, there would be needed thousands of developer hours to make a new (competitor) product.

Developers should afraid of the competition, as the competition is the power what pushes us forward. Also GT has so much time advantage before any developers, that new developers (even if they can use the whole GT library) could not reach GT.
GT will always be the lead directory software developer (IMHO it is).
I'd like to see GT a successful company, as I want to have continous updates for the GT apps in the future.
Also, hopefully the new licensing scheme starting from v3.x, hopefully will make GT a recurring income, which will mean for us (the users of GT apps), a guarantee, that GT development is continuing in the future.

The current problem seems to be, that the active users on GT forum are (seems to be) less & less. GT forums would need some fresh blood, new users, new plugin developers, new helper developers in the forum.
My goal is to fresh up the user base of the forum a bit... I'm committed to GT products, as I'm happy owner of an LSQL license, and just bought an DBMan SQL license, too. You should just understand, that the forum activity should be increased somehow, as I feel things are slowed down on the forum.
CPAN would be a good place to start to get activity.


I feel enlarging the user base using CPAN, may help a bit to make the GT apps more popular, the GT company more successful.
So, if GT modules are published to CPAN, the results are supposed to be following:
  1. it's a free advertisement for GT website & GT apps & GT forum
  2. new users, developers are attracted to the forum
  3. new users are likely spending money to buy GT apps
  4. new developers are freshig up the forum activity
  5. new developers will spend some money for paid support on the used modules
  6. new developers will spend time in the forum to help new, beginner developers, for whom they can sell plugins
  7. the more plugin is available for the GT apps, the more wider feature range is reached, the more users & developers are attracted, developing more plugins, and so on...
  8. modules may be improved by anybody, so GT may win free developers, and shorten some development times


In general, I think this would fresh up the user base & the GT app developments.
I'm sure, more users will mean more income for GT, and not less.

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
Quote:
Then likely you and Andy wasn't one of those developers, who submitted more thousand modules into CPAN... If those developers would have thinked like you (not to release any module to public), then currently we simply would not have any modules available in CPAN...

May I point out that I have a PAUSE account? http://search.cpan.org/~pputnam/

You'll notice that it's empty. I came to a decision after I opened my account, that it is in my best interest to charge for any module, script, or work I do. This stems from my experience as a once fairly prolific Links 2.0 mod contributor. I missed opportunies to make thousands off my work. Other users charged for their work, while I gave out nearly everything for free. So, gone are the days I give out anything for free.

I can certainly see your point of view. However, I think something like this should only be done in a more closed system. If I'm not mistaken, someone mentioned (Jagerman?) a developer's license had been discussed, and I'd be all for that personally. But I'd be gutted as a paid licensee of their products to see components that had been only commerially available moved to free public consumption.

Philip
------------------
Limecat is not pleased.
Quote Reply
Re: [fuzzy logic] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
Quote:
I missed opportunies to make thousands off my work. Other users charged for their work, while I gave out nearly everything for free. So, gone are the days I give out anything for free.

Note, I also couldn't afford, to give my developments for free. I know, developers must have some income to live, and do have financial base to continue their development. This is true for most developers. I don't await either from GT to work for free.
I didn't suggest, to make Links SQL or any product give away for free. Just the GT library or part of it, which would attract developers here. Developers are usually also site admins. And site admins are the developers, who buys the Links SQL and DBMan SQL products.
As I pointed out, making something freely available, doesn't mean, that you can not profit from it. You may see, that I have only 1 freeware product, and others are commercial products. The reason of commercial products is, that we have to live from something. The reason of freeware product is, the advertisement.
I don't have CPAN module released, yet. Maybe if I can reach to get regular income from my developments, I will be able to afford a free CPAN module.

I could agree to buy myself a developer's license, if I use GT library for commercial project to my client.
But note, having a developer's license, will not activate the forum, and will not result more users here (at least not significant).
That's the only problem.


Quote:
If I'm not mistaken, someone mentioned (Jagerman?) a developer's license had been discussed, and I'd be all for that personally. But I'd be gutted as a paid licensee of their products to see components that had been only commerially available moved to free public consumption.

How about a licence, which would
- require registration for business usage
- free for non-profit usage
- and still submitted to CPAN?

I can not leave out CPAN from wishlist, as it would be the salt for GT popularity, the free advertisement for GT.

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Last edited by:

webmaster33: Mar 4, 2005, 5:27 AM
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
what makes you so certain that a developers license will not foster new activity in the forums?????

Philip
------------------
Limecat is not pleased.
Quote Reply
Re: [fuzzy logic] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
Quote:
what makes you so certain that a developers license will not foster new activity in the forums?????
Only those developers would buy developers license, who already own a GT app, and saw power of GT application framework.

So just a developer's license will not attract new developers to the forum (or at least not significant).

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
The problem of releasing to CPAN as I can see is that you're then really obliged to support the modules for users that use them for other programs and older versions that are out dated.

Thus, it's a waste of GTs resources. They will lose money. What business sense does it make to support old versions of your modules that may be in use by a third party product? Even a third party paid-for-product, with no revenues going to yourself?

What happens when all the users of this board scream out for a new feature. That feature will only be possible by upgrading key libs and breaking compatability. What then? Not introduce the feature because you'll screw the libs for thousands of other applications out there or concentrate on upgrading the libs for the good of your software and your customer base?

No brainer.

- wil
Quote Reply
Re: [Wil] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
Quote:
The problem of releasing to CPAN as I can see is that you're then really obliged to support the modules for users that use them for other programs and older versions that are out dated.

Thus, it's a waste of GTs resources. They will lose money. What business sense does it make to support old versions of your modules that may be in use by a third party product? Even a third party paid-for-product, with no revenues going to yourself?

Did you even read my posts? It doesn't seem to...

My answer was here:
Quote:
GT could give paid support for the GT modules released on CPAN. Asking a $40-$50/hour support fee would also mean extra income for GT company... While existing clients would be still supported for free, according to the license rules.
New CPAN users would also refresh the forum a bit, meaning activity, self-help potential, and clients....
Modules released to CPAN are not obligated to have support...
But if you still do support, you can safely ask money for support...
All these facts can be clearly defined in the License, when you release a library to the public.


Quote:
What happens when all the users of this board scream out for a new feature. That feature will only be possible by upgrading key libs and breaking compatability. What then? Not introduce the feature because you'll screw the libs for thousands of other applications out there or concentrate on upgrading the libs for the good of your software and your customer base?

That not true. New features are NOT depending on if you release GT lib to the public or not.
Commercial clients of course always had priority over freeware users...
So what are you talking about then?

Best regards,
Webmaster33


Paid Support
from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...

Last edited by:

webmaster33: Mar 4, 2005, 9:01 AM
Quote Reply
Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
I made a long detailed reply, then figured a short one would work.

While it could be in GT's interest to release the libs, *IF* they could properly support them, it would *NOT* be in their interest, if they could not support them.

Two things would/could happen. 1) they would be looked upon negatively, and it would HURT rather than help their image, and 2) they could lose control over the development of their modules, as more active developers with fewer other obligations take over modifications.

While there is a great benefit from open-sourcing modules and libraries, there is a responsibility that goes with them. You cannot release and ignore them, especially if you develop commercial products on top of them.

You can agree or disagree with this, but it remains a business fact. The most successful CPAN/PERL modules are ones that are actively supported. No module is written in stone. Something always comes up that requires a change or addition. RESPONSE time is important, and GT has other considerations than supporting an open source community. It would be wonderful if they could, but the realities are they can't, not at this time.

If GT could manage to find a support person to deal with CPAN, and maintain the modules, they would get an awesome boost in recognition from the use of those modules. I can't imagine programming in perl without them, and many other people have gotten hooked on them as well. But, realistically, you can't just throw things out and hope it works. That makes no sense, financial or otherwise. Releasing a well supported module, that brings customers to you for custom work, custom support services, or application development *IS* a financially sound business model. When, such time comes as GT can do that, I'm sure they will. Until that time, asking them to give up their IP rights is somewhat silly, and even arrogant.

These are my opinions, and do not reflect GT's motivations or plans in anyway.


PUGDOG� Enterprises, Inc.

The best way to contact me is to NOT use Email.
Please leave a PM here.
Quote Reply
Re: [pugdog] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
CPAN release of GT lib or some GT modules is not new discussion here.
Just there wasn't a thread with such topic, so I decided to attract such discussions into a separate thread.

As for your comment.
Yes, there are risks when releasing something to the public domain, and there are no guarantees, that things may go the same way as you planned in your business.
However seeing that the forum activity decreases is a bad sign. And this should be handled somehow. Free advertisement for a business is something, that is fine for a decreasing business. And I believe forum activity and business success *may* be related.
The best thing what GT could do, to increase the respose rate and get more satisfied forum posters.
No, GT development staff should not spend more time on the forum.
Instead the forum activity and helper developer activity should be increased.
There are several ways to do this, and CPAN is one marketing way.

  • The CPAN way:
    I aggree with you, that not necessarily should be released the full GT lib to CPAN. As you say, even 1 module can be good enough to reach similar financial and/or marketing result. There is mainly 1 module, which would fit for that task. The GT::Template module. It is known already, and could attract a some developers. Hmmm, but I'm still hesitating if the GT::Template would be enough to activate the forum...

  • The "Increasing the forum effectiveness" way:
    I posted a suggestion which would help that goal:
    "Got solution" marking system for threads


    These are 2 possible solutions to help the current situation.

    Best regards,
    Webmaster33


    Paid Support
    from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
    Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
  • Quote Reply
    Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
    Don't misread a decrease in forum activity as a bad thing.

    Links 2.x is _stable_ and runs out of the box in most cases. The plugins area is well stocked, and automated. There are many, many messages detailing any minor problem or how-to.

    There will be much more activity with the beta being released.

    Also, and this is something you can't fight, is that PHP has made inroads in a lot of areas, because it runs on lower grade hosts. It also has some advantages when multiple people or groups are working on a site, in that each can affect their area directly. It also has dangers -- too many IMHO to consider using on such a site. But some people like to live dangerously.

    I don't like PHP because it embeds code in the HTML. That violates one of the long-standing, and iconoclastic rules for application development -- eg: separate process from output, code from interface.

    It also allows a server to "burp" and spit out program code.

    The more it tries to fix those problems, the more like PERL it becomes, and needs higher-priviledge access, so why not use PERL?? Perl started with a concept to be more than a "personal home page processor" and was designed to manipulate text and documents, which is what made it perfect for the WWW. Once you run GTs modules on top of that, there is no need to use anything else. CPAN can fill in all the widgets you need. Any pure-perl widgets can be added to your Links install, not the main perl directory.

    Bottom line, is sometimes, silence really is "golden."


    PUGDOG� Enterprises, Inc.

    The best way to contact me is to NOT use Email.
    Please leave a PM here.
    Quote Reply
    Re: [pugdog] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
    I will not really answer for PHP vs. Perl thoughts, as we can not really affect this competition.
    But I think Perl is still used on a lot websites (even on serious ones), and still has a lot users.
    I think forum activity decrease is not related to Perl vs. PHP war.
    Also note, GT just dropped PHP support for 3.x GT apps.

    Lower forum activity could also come from the fact, that there are less companies doing business on the internet, compared to a few years earlier, but I don't think, that would affect so much the forum activity.
    I think we would be close to the truth, if we would seek the problem around disappointed users, who don't get (enough) answer to their problem.


    Quote:
    Don't misread a decrease in forum activity as a bad thing.

    Links 2.x is _stable_ and runs out of the box in most cases. The plugins area is well stocked, and automated. There are many, many messages detailing any minor problem or how-to.
    I would be glad, if that would be true.
    But I'm afraid it's not.

    I saw several unanswered posts on the forum, back to 2002, 2003, or 2004. That's could result as many disappointed users.
    And in last 1-2 years, GT staff seems to show low activity on the forum, answering only the most important (mainly bugfix) questions. I saw even Pre-Sale question which was left unanswered. That would also mean some lost potential users...

    The CPAN idea and the "Got solution" marking system for threads are targeting the goal to increase forum activity.
    But for example, I was not even got any GT staff reply about, if they like the "Got solution" marking system for threads idea or not.
    We, plugin developers, moderators, forum helpers, and even people looking for solutions would get a lot help with this small feature, as everybody could visually see (without reading each post) which problem was solved and which not. This could also show the number of satisfied users. This would be an important feature to implement, and the attached rating system would result race condition between forum users, as they would be interested to give successful help to others...


    As the bottom line of forum activity thought, while I would like if it would be true, that silence means no disappointed users. However I feel the opposite.

    Best regards,
    Webmaster33


    Paid Support
    from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
    Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
    Quote Reply
    Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
    Hey, that was my idea! :D As much as I'd like to use GT::* modules in my projects I understand their concerns. You've got to look at both sides of the coin. If they do release their modules to CPAN then they feel somewhat obligated to support them. I can't blame them for that and it really seems as if they are too busy to take that on. On the other hand, like I already mentioned in another post, they would have the Perl community at large to assist with development in the form of patches and general feedback and discussion. Look at modules like DBI, Class::DBI, HTML::Template, Template-Toolkit, etc. They are all thriving with active development and community support.

    In my opinion[1] GT would end up with more business out of it. Maybe they are not in a position to take on that business. Maybe that business doesn't make up for the additional overhead spent on supporting the modules on CPAN. Heck, maybe it wont drum up any new business at all (or worse.) Who knows?

    As far as bringing life back to the forum, I dont know that that is really an issue for GT. In fact, I dont think the forums have really subsided *that* much. I will bet that you will see a big increase in forum activity when the new releases start coming out. Keeping up with the forum must take several hours per week out of GTs already hectic schedule and the increased traffic will consume even more.

    I know GT mentioned a possible licensing plan for their modules and I would be very interested in that but I will not push that issue either. I surely dont see that happening any time soon. The people who hound GT on their release dates bug the heck out of me and I can just imagine how GT feels about it. Its funny how were hoping to have something in the next month or two but not firm dates yet. turns into You promised to have a new, bug free, version out by now! two weeks later.

    Personally, Ive started using other modules (from CPAN) to fill the gap. I use CGI::Application as a framework for most of my projects now. Im looking into Class::DBI for my DB abstraction layer and Ive been using HTML::Template for a while now. I dont find either of the latter to be the replacement for GT::SQL and GT::Template but they work. Ive actually been looking at moving to Template-Toolkit as its a closer match to GT::Template. It is still not what I really want but the GT withdrawal pains are slowly fading :)

    ~Charlie

    Code:
    if_it_works_for_GT() ? $release_to_CPAN++ : $GT_dev_license++;

    [1] Remember, opinions are like arses, everybody has one.
    Quote Reply
    Re: [Chaz] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
    Quote:
    Hey, that was my idea! :D
    Yes, you published this idea as first on the GT forum.
    I just opened a thread for it, as there wasn't such thread with subject, yet Cool


    Quote:
    On the other hand, like I already mentioned in another post, they would have the Perl community at large to assist with development in the form of patches and general feedback and discussion. Look at modules like DBI, Class::DBI, HTML::Template, Template-Toolkit, etc. They are all thriving with active development and community support.

    In my opinion[1] GT would end up with more business out of it.
    I absolutely aggree with that opinion.

    Also content your full post is something I can aggree with.


    Quote:
    Personally, Ive started using other modules (from CPAN) to fill the gap. I use CGI::Application as a framework for most of my projects now.
    Well, I believe that if you own a Links SQL license, you can fully use GT modules for your personal projects.
    If you work for a client, you can buy a Links SQL license for $450 for the client, and add your development work using the GT library for your development price. That's a legal way, I think.

    If you want to save the $450 cost for client development, then yes, you must stick to free CPAN modules, like CGI::Application, DBI, and HTML::Template.


    Quote:
    I will bet that you will see a big increase in forum activity when the new releases start coming out.
    That always happens like this. For a while at least. Then fallback to inactivity happens.
    This means, existing users are watching the GT Announce forum, but unfortunately this also means, that there are not appearing too much new users.

    And this is a big problem, IMHO.

    Best regards,
    Webmaster33


    Paid Support
    from Webmaster33. Expert in Perl programming & Gossamer Threads applications. (click here for prices)
    Webmaster33's products (upd.2004.09.26) | Private message | Contact me | Was my post helpful? Donate my help...
    Quote Reply
    Re: [webmaster33] CPAN release of GT lib (or modules) In reply to
    Quote:
    Well, I believe that if you own a Links SQL license, you can fully use GT modules for your personal projects.
    If you work for a client, you can buy a Links SQL license for $450 for the client, and add your development work using the GT library for your development price. That's a legal way, I think.

    If you want to save the $450 cost for client development, then yes, you must stick to free CPAN modules, like CGI::Application, DBI, and HTML::Template.

    I've used the GT libs for my personal stuff and for a few others on the board that have GT products and it works out great. The problem is that I also do a great deal of commercial work and it just seems like a back door way of doing things to buy a license (I would probably go with GForum over Links though :) $$) just to use GT modules. I don't think thats how GT intended it. Now if they did to some sort of developers license I would be all for that.

    Quote:
    Yes, you published this idea as first on the GT forum.
    I just opened a thread for it, as there wasn't such thread with subject, yet

    Definitely worth the discussion. At least GT will know that there are people interested.

    ~Charlie