Hello,

My company edits and sells a kind of modular CMS oriented versus CRM.
Our product is on its ramp up.
I want to add a module, just like DDN module, offering users the possibility to add a forum to this CMS.

Is it possible to use YAF if we offer the adapted YAF source code (but not our main source) on a free FTP download with the COPY clause included in our module ?
The Forum extension itself will be a free extension.
I have searched for a commercial license like ScrewTurn Wiki but you don't seem to offer one.


Moreover and related to my first posts here, I would appreciate installing YAF without c# code, using a YAF assembly in place of app_code and simply delivering with it the corresponding aspx and ascx files.
Our installation process based on our own packages is limited and we don't install c# files.
I have read this post which seems to allow this install process.
http://forum.yetanotherforum.net/yaf_postst5603_YAF-License-Question.aspx 


I have problems with some ashx where the code is directly in the ashx and not in code behind, I will certainly isolate the code from the ashx itself.

I also have problems with the YAF membership provider which necessitates its own table and I'm inclined to take the easy solution of having a double login. Not very user friendly but it avoid mixing code.

The .net 2 membership provider concept shows here its limitations, we should have better assumed way of mixing providers directly in a common interface.


Thanks for answer.


CS

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html  - will explain your license questions.

Moreover and related to my first posts here, I would appreciate installing YAF without c# code, using a YAF assembly in place of app_code and simply delivering with it the corresponding aspx and ascx files.
Our installation process based on our own packages is limited and we don't install c# files.

From my knowledge of the above link, yes you can do it. However you still have to distribute the GPL text with this new modified binary, and provide the people you have distributed to with a link to the source code of your modified distribution.

I also have problems with the YAF membership provider which necessitates its own table and I'm inclined to take the easy solution of having a double login. Not very user friendly but it avoid mixing code.

You don't have to use our membership provider, only the profile provider needs to be inherited. (Quite a few examples of people using the standard ASP.NET Membership Provider). But regardless of the provider you use, the information (exempting passwords) will synced to the YAF_user table.

---

Thanks for fast answer,

I must apology but I am not sure to have understood the terms of the license FAQ and I would appreciate to have confirmation.

Could we do what I was proposing : redistribuing the YAF module as a free one and providing our customer with the full source code + what we have modified in it (with doc 🙂 ) + the licence inside the YAF folder ?


Concerning the membership, do you mean that using our provider will be Ok for YAF ?
That I will not have to modify the login and register as explained in wiki ?

Last questions:
- is there a way to have YAF working in the internal network with Windows Authentication, without necessity to register ?
- is there a way o keep all the yaf folders as 'Pages' inside the YAF subfolder ? I have hanged the YAF.BaseUrl in web.config to ~/YAF/ but it still look for ~/Pages to find its acsx ?

Thanks again for help.

CS

Don't bother with my root related question
I found the YAF.Root config.key and its working

Thanks
CS

Thanks for fast answer,

I must apology but I am not sure to have understood the terms of the license FAQ and I would appreciate to have confirmation.

Could we do what I was proposing : redistribuing the YAF module as a free one and providing our customer with the full source code + what we have modified in it (with doc 🙂 ) + the licence inside the YAF folder ?

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLInProprietarySystem 

Particularly this section:

You cannot incorporate GPL-covered software in a proprietary system... However, in many cases you can distribute the GPL-covered software alongside your proprietary system. To do this validly, you must make sure that the free and non-free programs communicate at arms length, that they are not combined in a way that would make them effectively a single program.

Your extension for example will very much be covered by the GNU-GPL license and thus, the extension and your YAF modifications will have to distributed.

It's such a grey area; the safest course would be seek some legal consultation and distribute completely seperately to your main app.

---

Concerning the membership, do you mean that using our provider will be Ok for YAF ?
That I will not have to modify the login and register as explained in wiki ?

Last questions:
- is there a way to have YAF working in the internal network with Windows Authentication, without necessity to register ?
- is there a way o keep all the yaf folders as 'Pages' inside the YAF subfolder ? I have hanged the YAF.BaseUrl in web.config to ~/YAF/ but it still look for ~/Pages to find its acsx ?

Thanks again for help.

CS

1) Yes your provider will be ok for YAF as long as its based on the usual asp.net membership provider.
2) No modifications should be necessary other than the inheritance of the YAF profile provider (this could leave you with the license issues in the other question).
3) Supposedly, some steps have been taken to do this by others on the forum (have a search about) but I've never done it personally.
4) You figured out with Root :-)

---

Back to the licensing issue: It very much depends on how you are planning to use YAF in the CMS as a module if you read the following excerpt. Providing a wrapper to integrate the two is unfeasible under the license.

I'd like to incorporate GPL-covered software in my proprietary system. Can I do this by putting a “wrapper” module, under a GPL-compatible lax permissive license (such as the X11 license) in between the GPL-covered part and the proprietary part?

No. The X11 license is compatible with the GPL, so you can add a module to the GPL-covered program and put it under the X11 license. But if you were to incorporate them both in a larger program, that whole would include the GPL-covered part, so it would have to be licensed as a whole under the GNU GPL.

The fact that proprietary module A communicates with GPL-covered module C only through X11-licensed module B is legally irrelevant; what matters is the fact that module C is included in the whole.

But then the key word is incorporate.. in lawyer speak i think.

Edit:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#NFUseGPLPlugins 

Gives you:

It depends on how the program invokes its plug-ins. For instance, if the program uses only simple fork and exec to invoke and communicate with plug-ins, then the plug-ins are separate programs, so the license of the plug-in makes no requirements about the main program.

If the program dynamically links plug-ins, and they make function calls to each other and share data structures, we believe they form a single program, which must be treated as an extension of both the main program and the plug-ins. In order to use the GPL-covered plug-ins, the main program must be released under the GPL or a GPL-compatible free software license, and that the terms of the GPL must be followed when the main program is distributed for use with these plug-ins.

If the program dynamically links plug-ins, but the communication between them is limited to invoking the ‘main’ function of the plug-in with some options and waiting for it to return, that is a borderline case.

Using shared memory to communicate with complex data structures is pretty much equivalent to dynamic linking.

---

Thanks, I agree with you.

Here again we leave the normal understanding for the lawyers territory.
Its getting worse and worse and...I am not very young.

The good idea seems to have it totally separated and offered as a facility.

I see in the API that something is dedicated to DNN and RainBow portals, it could be good to av a more general way telling YAF is under, may be having an API for it.

What is the meaning of i=1, I see that you use it in query string for Rainbow, removing the returnurl for it ?

Thanks.
CS

As I said we will certainly fear some action around this license and I will do fewer adaptations.

Text you extracted speaks of 'dynamically calling' and 'sharing data structures'.
With this material, lawyers could spend many time and earn lot of money ... which will diseappears just like CO2 consumming O2.

Nowdays many applications take their information from network connection points and share data structures.
That's rather ambiguous, enough to kill energy.
Sad...

It is factually easier to find a commercial product.
I will do some more testing ...

Thanks again
CS