Mybb community, very immature.

[ZiNgA BuRgA]

That's an interesting point you make there.  But essentially, I don't think modified code will be blindly copied across, rather, it will most likely be manually merged, and since ideas don't fall under copyright/copyleft, you can easily get around any license restrictions that way.
So in effect, even if you fork the LGPL project and make it GPL, changes made in the fork can go back into the original project, as long as the developers can show that the code wasn't copied (i.e. modify it enough to make it perceptually different).  But this is a bit more difficult I guess, than simply copying changes across, so does provide some protection.

There's also the question of what your fork is exactly trying to achieve as well.
Yes, there are many issues in MyBB which can be fixed, but unfortunately, MyBB seems to primarily target the majority webmaster community, which is mostly made up of people clueless about these issues.  One of the reasons why MyBB is successful is due to the overwhelming number of features it has for a free forum software.  Even if there are issues with these features, the fact that it "works most of the time" will probably be sufficient for the wider community.
The issue here is that trying to promote a bug-fixed fork of MyBB will be difficult, if you plan to gain a fair bit of a following.  You're probably better off trying to develop new features (and spend less time polishing them) to gain attention.

That's from a development point of view - there's a number of other issues you need to consider.  Although doing it for your moral beliefs is nice in theory, it can be fraught with practical issues.

Nice to see you here BTW, frostschutz - IMO, you're one of the most talented coders in the community, have a good technical expertise in the field and generally very helpful too.

[Harry]

(06-08-2010 09:48 PM)frostschutz Wrote:  

(06-08-2010 09:55 AM)Harry Wrote:  I think MYBB needs to be forked.

If anyone wants to fork MyBB, after the MyBB 1.6 LGPL release would be a good time.

Forking GPL projects is usually unattractive because the original authors can just say "thank you", take the best of the fork and integrate it back into their original project. And any smart authors would do just that. In practice this means a GPL fork can't get a leg up on the GPL project because any real improvements you make to the fork, will also be in the original project. Giving users no incentive to switch.

If MyBB 1.6 is licensed LGPL however the story is different. It would mean that the original project is LGPL, whereas the fork can be GPL.

This means any improvements or fixes made to the original project, can be taken into the fork (since nothing prevents LGPL => GPL). So any improvements the original project makes, your fork has them too. At the same time, any improvents you make in your fork, can't be taken back into the original project, since it doesn't work in the other direction (GPL => LGPL) - you can't just take GPL code and declare it to be Lesser GPL.

GPL is often referred to as a virulent license and it's true, since even the LGPL is, in a way, still GPL, in that it does not stop you to go back to GPL at all.  It wouldn't work like that for BSD or MIT.

MyBB in general is the ideal fork candidate; most of its developers are incapable and the project itself is already declared dead, as the current codebase will be abandoned  in favour of a complete rewrite. No other project rejects so many simple to implement improvements in favour of a vaporware that may never be released.

That said, I don't see anyone in the MyBB community who would actually be able to fork this project. If there's one more requirement to make a fork succeed, it's that you need capable developers on the team that's doing the fork, and within the MyBB community, there quite simply aren't any. If you decide to do it, it may be a good experience for you personally, but I highly doubt you'd be getting anywhere with it.

Thanks.. Appreciate the great post. Despite what some think i would not even consider jumping blindly into something like this as is. Yeah i have a little more sense then some think.

[MattF]

(06-08-2010 10:11 PM)ZiNgA BuRgA Wrote:  The issue here is that trying to promote a bug-fixed fork of MyBB will be difficult, if you plan to gain a fair bit of a following.  You're probably better off trying to develop new features (and spend less time polishing them) to gain attention.

Not necessarily. Anyone who does any coding at most levels would most likely prefer a bug free, (as much as humanly possible), version. There are more and more site admins actually taking to the coding side of things these days, (either through necessity or pure choice), so that they can modify their boards themselves. They are more likely to appreciate a solid system rather than the all singing all dancing version, especially if mods/plugins follow to add the extra functionality.

In my opinion, the system would be far more appealing if the base system had less in it and the additions were punted into plugins instead. A smaller core but with the additional functionality available if required.

The you have the development side of things. If there is a Dev team who is going to take all bug reports seriously, no matter how minor the issue may seem, that would also be another plus point.

[ZiNgA BuRgA]

(06-09-2010 05:12 AM)MattF Wrote:  Not necessarily. Anyone who does any coding at most levels would most likely prefer a bug free, (as much as humanly possible), version. There are more and more site admins actually taking to the coding side of things these days, (either through necessity or pure choice), so that they can modify their boards themselves. They are more likely to appreciate a solid system rather than the all singing all dancing version, especially if mods/plugins follow to add the extra functionality.

Which, unfortunately, from what I've seen, is a small minority.
Even if there is quite a few of these, they certainly aren't very prominent in the community most of the time, since they never seek support, they never show up.  And thus, what people see is those newbs promoting something that's all full of bells and whistles.
Another issue is that larger sites aren't always directed by people who can code.  In fact, they're most likely run by people who can market their site, rather than code it.  Personally, I'd go for the more marketed community than one which is really customised.  So this means that larger sites may be running systems which aren't coded up so nicely, as long as it works reasonably well.
In the end, the devs need to make compromises.

[MattF]

Good points, in general. I suppose it mainly depends upon personal philosophy and the expected result, at the end of the day. Compromise would only be necessary if one aims to get on a similar level or surpass the userbase of the original project. If ones intent is to actually provide a more robust and consistent solution, at the expense of possibly having a smaller userbase, then no compromise would be necessary. I personally think the latter is the better approach, but that's just me.

[ZiNgA BuRgA]

Yes, I agree, if you are willing to take the effort and time, I think fewer concessions can be made.