Plugin: StarSign Matchmaking Horoscope

pateta12 wrote:

trail wrote:

Ah ok!! Sorry for the misunderstanding.

The statistics is ONE piece of code therefor you cannot put things in between parts of statistics.

It MIGHT be possible to put the signs on TOP of statistics but i need to ask CB main developer and personal GuRu Beat for advice to make sure.

Trail, I might be mistaken but I think that what Redlaguna really wants is to be able to move the Age/Zodiac Sign from the "Statistics" tab and place it in the "Basic Information" tab that he has under the person's picture.

:laugh:

if, I want to do that but does not work.

Thanks pateta12

You basicly want to add it to another tab ?

Thats not possible either, and i cannot make it possible without hacking core cb files.

Currently its only possible to put it below core statistics, not even on top, and not anywhere else.

I am checking if its possible to put it on top of statistics.

And i COULD make an option to make it available as a tab but that tab would be standalone and it would look ugly to have such an empty tab with only this plugin. But to merge it with another tab is not possible. But i'll ask beat to make sure.

Hi Trail,

trail wrote:

The plugin figures out the viewers starsign and the profile ownsers starsign and shows the matchmaking horoscope between him/her and the profile being visited.

* Terms of Use
* This plugin is a closed source proprietary product.
* A licence to use this plugin is for ONE domain.
* Do not illegaly distribute or use on multiple domains.
* You are not allowed to change this code without permission.
* Dutch law and international copyright laws apply to their fullest extents.
* Place of court in case of litigation is Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
* Contact author if you need to do something that's not allowed herein.
* This copyright may change at any time without notice.

Available for a minimum donation of 7,50 euros payable by paypal The extremely cheap price is an experiment to test the concept if more websites will take it. I am betting with someone that it will backfire because we are conditioned to believe that cheap stuff is not good enough. But who knows, i might get rich (doubth it)

I'd just like to comment on your experiment, as I don't believe your results (aka bet) with someone is an untainted sign of "cheap" software and how webmasters would react to your software.

Firstly let me say, being a webmaster and domain/web hosting provider, I have no issues with contributing money to any project or paying for any piece of software, I have done so on many occasions. But for me, <u>closed source</u> software is the issue.

Although alot of GPL software is "free", the term "free" does not necessarily signify "no cost", but simply means "freedom" ie. unencumbered, unencrypted and open code.

This is why the name "Open Source" came about, and words like "free software", "freeware", etc was removed from describing such software. It's also why you'll find many GPL developers announce their GPL software as "Free, as in beer" ie. you get the freedom of open code, but still should contribute back (money, time, enhancements of code, etc).

So to summarise my point, just by releasing closed source code cheaply is not a good measure or experiment of how the web community and webmasters would react, since many do think like me (especially in Joomla since it is a GPL'ed product).

Financially supporting open source software is encouraged by all the opensource community, as the more financial support it has the more developers will be contributing their time to it.

Everyone makes their own decisions regardless, but I just thought it's something you may consider if you wish to perform another experiment in the future.

Regards,

Michael.

Hey thank you for your helpfull insight!

I am very new to the whole licencing thing and I couldn't find any GPL licence example where the source is open and the product is still protected. Frankly i don't understand that part. I thought GPL always ment its free and available for changing/editing/using/forking/butchering.

In actual sense i only want:

Everyone to know that it is not free.

Programmers to know that they cannot use this freely in their own projects.

Programmers to know that they need to contact me if they want (to contribute) changes.

I want to prevent forks.

The source is actually unencripted, but changes are not allowed without contacting me in order to prevent those forks.

I could change the licence to some GPL form where the above still counts. But i don't know how and i studied for 3 hours on those systems and i had a deadline to make since the first orders already arrived. So to be on the safe side i closed it off enterirely by making it closed source. (eventhough it is not encripted at all)

I can and am willing to change it if i get some expert help in this regard. *hint hint*

~Trail.

Hi trail,
This morning (California Time) I donated via Paypal to recieve the StarSign plugin.

How long usually takes for to send the file?

Let me know if you'd like me to PM the reciept to you.
TIA,

JD

Post edited by: joomladude, at: 2006/08/17 03:51

Wow. That was fast. I recieved your e-mail just now and I promise that will not spread it around as I am a proud supporter of Opensource movement and agree with Michael on the fact that "Opensource" does not equal to "freeware".

Keep up the good work.

JD