Which modules do you use regularly, but will not work with CMSms 2.0?
Would anyone be interested in sponsoring orphaned modules to be updated for 2.0?
Are there any devs out there that would take on a module and how much would you want to update it?
My list off the top of my head:
AceEditor
GBFilePicker
There are probably many more...
Simon66
Orphaned Modules and CMSMS 2
Orphaned Modules and CMSMS 2
Last edited by Simon66 on Fri May 29, 2015 4:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
calguy1000
- Support Guru
- Posts: 8169
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:44 pm
Re: Orphaned Modules and CMSMS 2
Most modules (possibly with the exception of Syntax/WYSIWIG hilighters) can be updated relatively easily, by the module author (copyright issues).
Most of my modules (with the exception of one that I know of) either work right out of the box or require only a couple of hours of adjusting.
That being said, CGFeedMaker will soon be broken due to some of the smarty scope/caching changes I've made in other modules, but those changes are not related to CMSMS 2.0.
If somebody wants to take a module and adapt it in any way (including for new versions of CMSMS), then according to forge rules, and ethics they should fork the module to a new name the module (and retain the proper copyright credits and license information).
That being said, I whole heartedly support the open source concept, as long as people take proper responsibility for their fork, and give proper credit to the original author(s).
Most of my modules (with the exception of one that I know of) either work right out of the box or require only a couple of hours of adjusting.
That being said, CGFeedMaker will soon be broken due to some of the smarty scope/caching changes I've made in other modules, but those changes are not related to CMSMS 2.0.
If somebody wants to take a module and adapt it in any way (including for new versions of CMSMS), then according to forge rules, and ethics they should fork the module to a new name the module (and retain the proper copyright credits and license information).
That being said, I whole heartedly support the open source concept, as long as people take proper responsibility for their fork, and give proper credit to the original author(s).
Follow me on twitter
Please post system information from "Extensions >> System Information" (there is a bbcode option) on all posts asking for assistance.
--------------------
If you can't bother explaining your problem well, you shouldn't expect much in the way of assistance.
Please post system information from "Extensions >> System Information" (there is a bbcode option) on all posts asking for assistance.
--------------------
If you can't bother explaining your problem well, you shouldn't expect much in the way of assistance.
Re: Orphaned Modules and CMSMS 2
Thanks for the reply Calguy.
I'm only really referring to forking abandoned modules. Modules that for whatever reason, the devs have moved on or no longer wish to update.
I wish I could code myself, but my brain just doesn't work that way.
But modules like GBFilePicker are used by other modules like ListIt2 and, to me, are as valuable as any of the bigger modules.
As a business that relies on these I would be happy to sponsor the forking and continued development of abandoned modules that are important to me.
I'm only really referring to forking abandoned modules. Modules that for whatever reason, the devs have moved on or no longer wish to update.
I wish I could code myself, but my brain just doesn't work that way.
But modules like GBFilePicker are used by other modules like ListIt2 and, to me, are as valuable as any of the bigger modules.
As a business that relies on these I would be happy to sponsor the forking and continued development of abandoned modules that are important to me.
Re: Orphaned Modules and CMSMS 2
Yes there are devs willing to do it. Make a specific request (Post a RFQ - Request for Quote) in the Help Wanted section will probably get more responses.
