Sandbox

erandror wrote:Oh, did you guys decide already?
I didn't read the whole 28 pages.

Too bad, I was looking forward to using Moomba Open Source.   

What was the final decision?

No, no name announced yet.  However, there are several name theads going which are better places to discuss names (makes it easier for the core team to see all the recommendations).  This is the threa for the official request for a new name... http://forum.opensourcematters.org/inde ... 272.0.html

Hi,

I have read a lot now but still have a lot of unanswered questions that I hope someone can be helpful with providing answers for:
1.  As I understand it Miro has given the copyrights and so fourth, so what is Mambo’s problem with them?
2.  Why do we have to change the name “Mambo” (and please let the new name be as short in letters as this one)?
3.  Will the two future versions of “Mambo” be able to use the same components, modules etc.?
4.  When we started using the “new” version of mambo 4.5.1 it was a great loss for the community to have so many components and modules not working any longer. Will this happen again?
5.  If the Mambo code is rewritten – will we have to change anything in our self-made components etc.?
6.  Will we ever stop recreating/reinventing this great Open Source project and actually reach a place where we can have a “final copy” that has everything that we all need and have been doing so for many years now?

As you all can read, I am not a big fan of the word Mambo, but I am a fan of not changing the name as this would mean:

• Loosing many of the fans to other “stable” CMS systems (present company not included)
• Only some people will understand the name change and the other will think the project is dead
• All the many thousand fan-sites stops for a long period as the name Mambo is included in the title
• All commercial products/pages will have a wrong title and start reinventing the (at that point) “new” marked
• Thousands of people will have to change there code and spend money on new homepages
• If new API or small changes: All components, modules, templates and “?“bots will have to be recoded or they will be lost – Again!
• All published books, articles and printed material are suddenly old
• All publicity the project has ever had is suddenly not accurate and can be locked upon as not existing

I other words – we are starting all over?
What would happen if Coca-cola changed name – how many would not know and begin drinking a new soda (or change to a new CMS)?

It strikes me that I am glad we need a new catch phrase as “power in simplicity” is anything but describing what’s happening – especially looking back in time. I hope that the users of the future will not find it odd that half of the files they need and homepages they get them from has a word like “Mambo” in it when all the system is called something different. 

Let’s just hope that the confusion of names and rebuilds when you are new to CMS it not the factor that makes people not chooses “Mambo” just as it was when many of us were new to it. 

Kampp wrote:I other words – we are starting all over?
What would happen if Coca-cola changed name – how many would not know and begin drinking a new soda (or change to a new CMS)?

I guess there is great difference. Most of the branding of C-C is (only) the name. And it works for them, because they have to earn money. And they maybe stupid if they try to change it. Accurate for C-C and for other "really big shots", but not for "our CMS".

Our CMS was and probably will be branded by the community. The branding, the name, ... only some kind of interresting for the "bigger ones" (e.g. like regional C-C Dealers). I, as the owner of a "small business firm", do not care about it. Customers never ask me for Mambo in the past and they would not ask me for "prodcuts" in the future. People are asking for advantages they get, if they decided to work together with our firm. So what i have to do is, to brand my own firm, my own business. As a private user of Mambo, i do not care a pap for it, because the name is useless for me. On the opposite side, the community is very helpful and useful for me. As a small business owner and for me in person, the name doesn´t matter, but the "community branding" at OpenSourceMatters a lot

Best regards,

Joern

As you can read my general subject/theme was not minded for the people using Mambo for there private businesses/cause, but the hole community (the backbone) and on how to make our dear CMS the best and most widely used CMS.

Therefore the coca-cola example was minded on the subject on publicity and what advantages a steady brand can give the community and most importantly the new future users.

Hope anyone has an answer for just one of the questions I asked...?

Kampp wrote:Hi,

I have read a lot now but still have a lot of unanswered questions that I hope someone can be helpful with providing answers for:
1.  As I understand it Miro has given the copyrights and so fourth, so what is Mambo’s problem with them?

Any discussion about Miro and the Mambo Foundation is better directed to their forum, not here.  The community here is not Miro, or part of the Mambo Foundation.  As to what individuals think about the changes Miro introduced, there is really no way of summing it up except to say that Miro went in a direction it decided and didn't take the community with them, so the community left.  The core dev team made their own announcement which no doubt you have read on the OSM site.

2.  Why do we have to change the name “Mambo” (and please let the new name be as short in letters as this one)?

Miro has applied for trademarks in the names "mamboserver"," Mambo CMS", and "Mambo".  The time for objecting to the first two trademarks was past by the time they announced their intentions and with those two trademarks set to go through, there is no point wasting valuable development time (or money) in what would probably be lengthy legal battles.

3.  Will the two future versions of “Mambo” be able to use the same components, modules etc.?

There will not be two future versions of Mambo.  There will be a Miro CMS, which may or may not bear much resemblance to previous stable releases, and there will be an as yet, unnamed, CMS which will come from the same core team of developers which brought us all the award-wining CMS we know.  The dev team haven't lost sight of the roadmap they planned for the future of the CMS.

4.  When we started using the “new” version of mambo 4.5.1 it was a great loss for the community to have so many components and modules not working any longer. Will this happen again?
5.  If the Mambo code is rewritten – will we have to change anything in our self-made components etc.?

Uh, yeah    This is par for the course whenever a new version of any software/code is released.

6.  Will we ever stop recreating/reinventing this great Open Source project and actually reach a place where we can have a “final copy” that has everything that we all need and have been doing so for many years now?

I sure hope not!  Nothing stays the same with technology and any code that stops still soon becomes obsolete.

[i]I other words – we are starting all over?

Nope, we are not starting over at all.  The only thing that has changed is that the core team (devs, plus the other teams, eg. translation, documentation, etc) and most of the community now hang out in a place not controlled by Miro.  The project still lives, everything is still exactly as it was, just not with Miro in the picture.  There will be a name change but it won't take long before the new name is just as well-known as the old.  What Miro does is their business, but for the people who believe that open source matters, its just business as usual.

Hope that helps.

1. Miro transferred the copyrights after they founded the Foundation. In the beginning, Miro wouldn't give them up.
2. There might be legal aspects for using the name Mambo (I don't follow the legal stuff so that is all I know). Since this is a split of Miro, why not choose a completely new name and continue what was started.
3. No. The future Mambo and OSM will be different in coding.
4. Yes, when Mambo 5.0 will be released. In the meantime, there is going to be a 4.5.3, 4.5.4, and maybe more.
5. For 5.0 yes. For 4.5.3 probably not, even though a few tweaks might be needed.
6. Hopefully not.

By the way, these are not official answers. These are just the ideas I get when reading the forum.

Kampp wrote:6.  Will we ever stop recreating/reinventing this great Open Source project and actually reach a place where we can have a “final copy” that has everything that we all need and have been doing so for many years now?

Just wanted to add something else to the response I gave earlier to this question.
I posted my answer then realised - I have sites out there which are still 4.5 1.0.9 which I have no intention of changing for now.  For those sites, 1.0.9 was the "final copy" in that it did everything I needed for those particular sites.  I'm not likely to change them until 5.0 is released.  The code won't stop being updated as long as there are developers around who want to do this, and as long as there are people who need improvements, but for the end user, the "final copy" becomes the one they are happy with, which does everything they need for a particular site/use.

Thank you both so much for clarifying those details, although some of them disturb me a great deal.

Especially the one with the components that has to be rewritten is high on my list. I just hope that the changes are not too radical so much can be salvaged.

1. If Miro really transferred the copyrights and trademark to Mambo Foundation what is the problem then? Am I missing something? Was the transfer cancelled or is Mambo Foundation Miro?

4 & 5. How can you be so calm Recreating/changing the components means so much work for a lot of people if they even do it. I see the Components as one of the strengths in a CMS, without them any CMS can be used in many cases. The Components make us unique...

I sure hope that it does not take to long before the future unmade CMS using php 5 comes out and that it proves not to have fewer features than 4.5.3/4.

Kampp wrote:Therefore the coca-cola example was minded on the subject on publicity and what advantages a steady brand can give the community and most importantly the new future users.

As you can read (and "in other words"): i guess nearly nothing. And i am not able to figure out the difference or the sense of parting , between the firms, individuals or whomever else, who are using Mambo and the community in a hole.

A brand strongly needs a community; a community has no need for a brand, a community brands itself. Out of my point of view, there is no community in a form of a homogeneous mass. The "community" is 1+1+1+... a mass of indiduals if you want. For, e.g. C-C, the "community" has to be a mostly homogeneous mass, to work best for them. Firms normally have a hierarchically construction. OpenSource projects a more, i guess, like amoebea.

In short: i guess there is a great difference between the brand of a firm and the brand of a community and also between the advantage of a firm-brand and the advantage of a community-brand.

Best regards,
Joern 

Kampp wrote:Thank you both so much for clarifying those details, although some of them disturb me a great deal.

Especially the one with the components that has to be rewritten is high on my list. I just hope that the changes are not too radical so much can be salvaged.

The first release, as I understand it, will be 4.5.3 - so, no radical changes there.  There is always some "tweaking" between versions.  The biggest change won't be until 5 is released.

1. If Miro really transferred the copyrights and trademark to Mambo Foundation what is the problem then? Am I missing something? Was the transfer cancelled or is Mambo Foundation Miro?

The Mambo Foundation was set up by Miro and, apparently, is controlled by Miro.  It's nothing to do with OSM.  Any questions you have about Miro or the Foundation really must be addressed to them, on their forum.

4 & 5. How can you be so calm Recreating/changing the components means so much work for a lot of people if they even do it. I see the Components as one of the strengths in a CMS, without them any CMS can be used in many cases. The Components make us unique...

The 3rd party developers will have to speak for themselves.  I don't develop components (apart from tweaking when I need to) but I do develop templates and make the necessary changes to old templates if needed.  It's not that I am "calm" about making the changes, its just that it is a fact of life that when core code changes there usually needs to be changes in component and often, template code as well.  More and more hosts are moving to php5 and this means a whole heap of code changes for many, many php developers.  We can't stop making changes if we want to keep our various codes working well together.

I sure hope that it does not take to long before the future unmade CMS using php 5 comes out and that it proves not to have fewer features than 4.5.3/4.

4.5.3 has not been released yet.  If you mean the Miro so-called "beta" 4.5.3 then you will have to discuss that at the other forum - it has nothing to do with OSM.  Miro took the CVS, changed it, and released their version before it was fit to be called a beta.  It is not the code the OSM developers were working on so there can be no support for it here.

I have a suggestion. Use a completely different product versioning.

Reasons:

  1) Miro has already moved on with the beta3. There will come a time when the versions don't match up.
  2) This product doesn't need the same versioning as the old product. It's more confusing when you have
      a versioning that is close, than it would be to have an entirely new versioning for the new product.
   

Try starting at version numbering at 5 or 6. We don't need to have anything close to the old software. I realize this community has the stance that we are just picking up where "we' left off. I would swallow a bit of pride and produce a unique product that separates itself from the other. Just start with numbering and the graphics etc...

The sooner we get started having a different product, the sooner it will become reality. That and it's much harder to switch versioning once the software has been released. It then causes even more confusion.

While I can understand the concept of a "re-branding effort", it's more logical to think in terms of producing an entirely separate and new product. In a few years it will certainly be that anyhow.

Releasing 4.5.3 or 4.5.4 as such isn't a good idea long term in my opinion. I'm looking at all of this 3 to 4 years out. Not the next *ambo release.

Oh the drama... beta3 is looking decent. I can see a lot of new layout and code.

xmlrpc rocks

rjs wrote:I have a suggestion. Use a completely different product versioning ...

I agree and that's why I made a similar suggestion, here.

lester wrote:

rjs wrote:I have a suggestion. Use a completely different product versioning ...

I agree and that's why I made a similar suggestion, here.

It's the only rational move. Forget Mambo or Mambo will always be tailing the community. When you split, you split.

richards wrote:Oh the drama... beta3 is looking decent. I can see a lot of new layout and code.

xmlrpc rocks

All this drama brought us here.

I've been designing websites for clients for almost nine years.  I'm sharing my comments in the hopes of learning, not to anger or incite people... also because this is one of the FIRST Mambo threads I've seen active replies on.

In the past, I would purchase development software.  For each client need I would search for a solution, pay my $50 (or so) and deliver my solution ontime.  This was cost effective, and efficient considering my next client would have different needs and a different budget so the process would repeat.

I took two years off, sold the company and moved to a farm in the country.  Sure enough, I couldn't keep away from the work, I loved designed website solutions too much.  Got new comps, signed up for a new web service (had my own before) and went back to work.

So much had changed in those two years, and ALL for the better.

The ONLY ONLY ONLY reason I ever even HEARD of Mambo or considered trying it was because of CPanel.  'Hard Core' devs took a long time to figure out that most users didn't host thier own servers as many forum threads and addons attest.  This didn't bother me because I like to tool around, I'm used to developing relationships with developers and giving it a try didn't cost me a dime.

The first thing I learned was that Open Source Software IS NOT FREE!  Assuming I'm a well paid proffessional, the time it takes to fix problems, search for solutions and try different methods costs WAY more than marketing my skills based on solid (however limited) packages.  A typical example is: 1) The client is THRILLED with how quickly their site is set up and their data imported. 2) The client is FURIOUS because many of their 'itty-bitty' changes don't show in their browsers. (because it took me DAYS of reading and testing to get them to work)  I also don't always have the option to pay to have copyright removed, which I'm 100% fine with, but isn't always easy to explain to clients.

HOWEVER! The flexability, and the confidence in an Open Source solution allows me to 'reuse' the lessons I learned from in the past. (for example... does anybody in the Core Dev realize that basically NO low-mid level Mambo user is aware of the contents of Language File?  Or that most web designers, including VERY highly paid ones, have ANY idea what CHMOD means?

I chose Mambo because I LOVE tooling around and digging for solutions.  I also had the confidence that Mambo was 'here to stay' and that not only would it improve and continue to reflect my needs, I would gain more control with each project I tackled.

So I dove it!  I set up about a dozen test sites to simply throw whatever I could at them.  I read the contents of almost every file in the package.  I purchased almost any 'pro' addon I could find, just to see what people were writing and to know what I could offer my future clients.  I offered several translations back to template designers and wrote detailed notes back to module designers.  I was on the verge of (after about 14 months and 30 sites) feeling a part of a 'community'.

So now this junk happens...

(As I wrote this I had planned to now add several points, but I think it comes down to this:)

1) Name the new version anything.
2) Don't get too wild with changes in the 'new freedom environment'.
3) GET THE PACKAGE ADDED TO CPANEL (I don't care what some say about it, just look at the install percentages)

If there isn't a clear direction for me to go, I'll have to scap 14 months of learning curve and move on... because no matter how much I love this work, in the end, it's about 'busy-ness'.

(TIP TO CORE: It looks like the most active addon developers are all 100% behind you... so I recommend snagging the MamboForge download statistics and having all of the dead developers, with the most popular addons, hand over their projects.  To the public's eye, 'more up-to-date addons = better CMS'.)

My return to the biz was going GREAT until this threat loomed.  I've never been stung by a strategic direction in the past... I really hope this isn't my first.

(Note, I think my email is visable, I'm ok with people contacting me privately if the content isn't for public consuption or unrelated to this thread.  The only thing I can offer the community is a few posts, feedback, maybe a theme or two and some beautiful, polished showcases of Mambo in action... I'm two weeks away from closing a contract worth over $1/4M and I'm frantically preparing to remove the 'Mambo' from the pitch and research backup solutions.  If there's a new name out there soon - SEND IT TO ME!!

Concerned developed,

Sleeper!

(PS - Spell Checker was too slow... so this post is 'As Is'.)

rjs wrote:You almost feel like logging in and mentioning the site here, but that would just stir up more issues pointing people away from the other forums.

I did that earlier today...got my account banned and deleted in less than 3 minutes  oops.

I find my self yet again confused with a couple of things...

1. What will happen to "Mambo"? Will Miro take over everything, of is it still independent developers/people?

2. Who updates the mamboforges and news at mamboserver?

3. How come new sites are created like the mambolove.com? Is it because of people that don't understand the situation or is it because "Mambo" will continue to exist as it is now, so to speak?

Cheers, Kampp

1. Miro has full control and will do with it what Miro wants to.
2. Miro has full control and will do with it what Miro wants to.
3. Miro has full control and will do with it what Miro wants to. mambolove.com is created by Miro.

Has anyone read the code of conduct for the foundation !  scary no freedom of speech ??

Hehe  Thanks Phil...

Then what is Miro's goal? They have destroyed something beautiful for the purpose of personal gain. But what are there plans? Should there "Mambo" still be free and try to run everything as it is now?

im wondering if peeps here still post at miiros forum...  or still activer there

does all the files in miiros website will be transfer to OSM new site? i.e. Documentation ?

Matrixguru wrote:
Has anyone read the code of conduct for the foundation !  scary no freedom of speech ??

Hi hi ... remindes mi a bit of the Franky Boy song :Stranger's in the night...
May could be re wrtiten in to 'Strangers in the net' ...

Cheers

Pete

p.s: I think this should be moved now to the Humor zone .. 

ghosty wrote:

Matrixguru wrote:
Has anyone read the code of conduct for the foundation !  scary no freedom of speech ??

Hi hi ... remindes mi a bit of the Franky Boy song :Stranger's in the night...
May could be re wrtiten in to 'Strangers in the net' ...

Cheers

Pete

p.s: I think this should be moved now to the Humor zone .. 

Done 

hope the new OSM dev.. can post new files for beta-testing.. so we can start? is there a CVS for the new OSM CMS?

Kampp wrote:1. What will happen to "Mambo"? Will Miro take over everything, of is it still independent developers/people?

Miro Development Team:
http://www.mamboserver.com/index.php?op ... 4&Itemid=1

Kampp wrote:2. Who updates the mamboforges and news at mamboserver?

Most news submitted to news.mamboserver.com is via the very basic Submission component:
http://news.mamboserver.com/index.php?o ... &Itemid=65
which I created to handle this and is than approved for publishing by Miro PR Staff

News on mamboforge.net is also submitted by the project maintainers and than approved by Miro PR Staff

Kampp wrote:3. How come new sites are created like the mambolove.com? Is it because of people that don't understand the situation or is it because "Mambo" will continue to exist as it is now, so to speak?

Marketing and PR move by Miro PR team

wyzemoro wrote:hope the new OSM dev.. can post new files for beta-testing.. so we can start? is there a CVS for the new OSM CMS?

It will be available via either CVS or SVN once we have the new OSM forge up and running.

The servers for these are currently provisioning and the software setup.

stingrey wrote:

wyzemoro wrote:hope the new OSM dev.. can post new files for beta-testing.. so we can start? is there a CVS for the new OSM CMS?

It will be available via either CVS or SVN once we have the new OSM forge up and running.

The servers for these are currently provisioning and the software setup.

can it be available thru FTP? so i can just wget the file?

Thanks stingrey.

If I understand is correct then:
Miro is taking over Mambo and trying to pretend nothing has happened and will keep Mambo alive?

In that case I see us more as a fork rather than a continuing development compared to what is said in the FAQ no. 1.
http://www.opensourcematters.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=7&Itemid=29

wyzemoro wrote:can it be available thru FTP? so i can just wget the file?

Not sure what the full capabilities of the new forge are, it may well support this, we will all find out hopefully very soon.