cptr13 wrote:YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!I beg to differ. Cognizo didnt pull any stunts. I care about open source and commercial software intellectual rights. I have posted elsewhere in this forum that I have taken great care to follow "open source" practices and legalities. I have complete right to do what I did by discontinuing CATS open source project. I am a strict follower of open source licenses and expect everyone on this forum to do the same.
I can not convey how friggin dissapointed that I was when Cognizo pulled the stunt that they pulled. I am so THRILLED that someone has taken the initiative to continue this project. PLEASE help out and let's keep this going. I am not technical but I'm more than happy to assist with documentation, feedback, etc.
Thanks thanks thanks!!!!!!!!!!
cptr13 wrote:Can we do a logo/Icon for cats? Is that allowed under the license? Cognizo doesn't really have one from the looks of it. I'd like to have a button I can slap on my site, to refer people here....The logo along with the words "CATS" are copyright Cognizo. You can't change the logo and not change the name. What you can do is change the name and then come up with a new logo. The footer of every rendered page, however, must follow CATS Public License (CPL) plus whatever else you want to to call your project.
Jos wrote:Well, I hope the "shout box" ends right here. I suggest people who still have problems with the way all went contact catsone.com directly. The way it goes now is the road to nowhere....are you suggesting a .co.uk vs .com deathmatch?
For those who like to flame war, I suggest get a copy of Halo combat evolved and multiplayer it on-line
asimbaig wrote:Come out of the closet, will you and post your real name. Tell me who you are and what you do for a living? Recruiter? ....I bet you are. In fact, I will give $100 to a charity of your choice, if you prove me wrong.....tell everyone on the forum, how many placements did you make last year for free?I'm not the object of your ire, but I'll qualify my comments according to your metrics.
asimbaig wrote:there WAS NO developer base. Thats the problem. 5000 posts on the forum...practically no code contribution. Developers are just not interested in a business applications. We wrote ALL the code, every line....you uninformed *&%#^. Go read the code. You will see it.With respect, I employed paid developers to work on CATS. If it were not for the CPL I'd have contributed all of it back to you. As it is we were going to modularise it to avoid the license problems. Some of it we would have charged money for (where it involved proprietary code from elsewhere), some of it we would have put back for free (and charged for integration / support). Now we have no marketplace (well, a few people here), no project to contribute back to, and no CATS-based business.
asimbaig wrote:We have the right to terminate the project as we see fit. We DID NOT have a developer community.IMHO that statement is why you don't have a developer community. We could all see that, we could all see that Cognizo didn't (seem to) want anyone else to make money. Without money to be made, who develops? You didn't do it out of charitable intent, why should we? Unfortunately, from my perspective, the way CATS has been structured encouraged lots of small (and not-so-small) end-users to use it for free, but did not appeal to those who actually develop code for verticals (systems integrators, consultants, and so on), not least because IMHO the CPL stopped their business stone dead. You're unusual (as am I) as a recruiter who codes.
asimbaig wrote:Go look at sourceforge. 80% of the projects are abandoned.Yes, and most of those are because they tried to reinvent the wheel, tried to pander to the egos of those involved, weren't really interesting, had a crap idea, had no roadmap or direction or leadership, and so on. Sourceforge is a great place to throw up a "project" and a bad place to build a community.
asimbaig wrote:How do I know it, because I actually have written and used open source for 17 years. I have contributed real code (not opinions like you) to real projects. We wrote code, gave it for free.That's always the problem, that "free" bit. It (to me, at least) denotes a mental link between code and money, which doesn't perhaps go to the heart of the OS software debate. The business isn't always in the code these days, of course not, it is in the overall offering. I'd have looked at 30k users and tried to work out how to monetize some of them, rather than begrudging them for getting the software for no outlay.
asimbaig wrote:The community that you refer to are recruiters mostly...who used CATS to run their businesses. There's about 12 guys who have posted 90% of all posts on the forums. 12 users posting regularly....30,000 downloads. How many active CATS installations is that....go figure. Where are the 29,900+ users??Well, for one, what is the case with other OS projects? Second, as you say, recruiters don't code. If I'd wanted to build a business around CATS (in the abstract) I'd have offered managed servers. I'd have bug-fixed for clients and posted the code back to you. I'd have developed the code because it would help my business and your business. But I'd have wanted to be guaranteed in return that my business wouldn't die tomorrow because you pulled the roadmap. And I'd not want to write and contribute new features until I knew that there was a framework to do them under and a license that kept those contributions open. There we go, that's why I didn't do what I wanted to originally when I saw the code, because the CPL didn't let me. And again you wonder why there were so few developers adding things?
I'm a temporary recruiter, as well as running a non-profit arts project (which I set up with £200k of my own money specifically to offer free and low-cost services to the arts world), a market research business, a headhunting business and some software interests. On a quick count, I did 20 placements for free last year. I'm happier as a resultI admire you for this....you have a lot more respect from me.... now.....
With respect, I employed paid developers to work on CATS. If it were not for the CPL I'd have contributed all of it back to you. As it is we were going to modularise it to avoid the license problems. Some of it we would have charged money for (where it involved proprietary code from elsewhere), some of it we would have put back for free (and charged for integration / support). Now we have no marketplace (well, a few people here), no project to contribute back to, and no CATS-based business.Please make sure to read CPL section 3.2. Availability of Source Code. If you didnt start with a module architecture, you are required to release your code on your website and let anyone have it for free. You cannot use modified CATS in your company until you do so. Thanks.
Your choice of licence makes a huge difference. Sugar (an example you've used) works because the module framework allows contributions...CATS had full support for modules early on. If you look under the docs folder, you will see DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES document. Look further under examples, and you will see 2 full documented modules. Anyone with even a basic knowledge of PHP could write modules for CATS. How many module contributions did we get....ZERO!!!!
But with the code changing so rapidly, and without notice, how could we keep up? It just wasn't stable enough to try to support module users in the real world.This is incorrect. The code was professionally developed and released with module versioning and module backword compatibility in mind. I understand that you are trying to make a case, but I am sorry, you are not stating facts. Its clear from your post, that you have never looked at CATS code seriously. Sorry...I respect your opinion, but in the absence of knowledge, one should be careful with broad comments like this....please review CATS code first.
Cognizo didn't (seem to) want anyone else to make money. Without money to be made, who develops? You didn't do it out of charitable intent, why should we?I see. So thats how you think open source development works. We didnt do it out of charitable intent.????? Dude 30,000 recruiting companies are using my software in 120 countries for $0.00
- By utetasty
It's essential to keep these synchronized to ensur[…]
- By Amora Pottera
Same problem as mine. Maybe you're right, I'll che[…]
- By Liam Smith
The error message you're encountering indicates th[…]
