TinyPortal

I would be interested in feedback on this - I might take it for a testdrive.

http://modxhost.com/

It looks like they have went with integrating SMF rather than reinventing the wheel.  They also have a blog feature - so that might be one way to bring a blog to SMF.

One cool feature about TinyPortal is that it is not mutually exclusive to a CMS.

Some links below:

OpenSourceCMS ModX link (http://opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=2101&Itemid=159)

A blog entry about SMF and ModX (http://kickasswebdesign.com/wordpress/2006/03/modx-now-has-smf-forum-integration)

Demo (http://chanh.blogdns.com/modx/WrapperSMF.html)  - might have to hit refresh once there (?)

I like it, it's interesting but what exactly "(is)" ModX??

crip

ModX is just another CMS that is just now getting heard. But it is cool that they have implemented SMF into it :P

Not really relevant on a TP board though it? This would be better discussed over a SMF (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php)

I made a theme for their site earlier ( gone now it seems), so I know a little of it. Modx is based upon a great CMS called Etomite, which is/was exactly what TP is striving for: efficient and small. How Modx is going right now I am not sure, others may tell more..but the foundation is good.

The best thing I like about TP is that it "is" SMF.

I hate intergrations because it's just more crap to keep up with. If TP disappeared, I'd prolly just quit making sites. I spent years on stuff I couldn't get to work the way I wanted. Now I look back and realize that It was a waste, other than I got a little bit of experince.

I checked it out fairly well, (MODX).. even installed it.. but it seems difficult in a lot of ways to me, they have a lot of nice Themes and such, just wasn't comfortable using it..they do use FCKeditor..but I didn't much like that.. suppose it's just preference..

i'm pretty sure that it's okay for iowa to post this here, it is after all "chit chat"... where you can "Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board. Please use the specific boards for any support on themes and TP."

;D

Quote from: Moocat on March 29, 2006, 04:36:39 AM
i'm pretty sure that it's okay for iowa to post this here, it is after all "chit chat"... where you can "Feel free to talk about anything and everything in this board. Please use the specific boards for any support on themes and TP."

I am going to be a good boy here and not put in any more than my two cent's worth.

1ÂÃ,¢: I agree with Moocat completely on this.

1ÂÃ,¢: I tried Etomite - while a decent portal, there is a lack of continuity in its operation - it isn't very intuitive.

2ÂÃ,¢ held to.   ;D

Thanks for (most of) the feedback ...

I did read where MODx is a "fork" of etomite and it does appear that etomite has more than just a lack of continuity/operation - I think it might be a complete lack - as in shutting down. I  read  (http://vertexworks.com/MODx.html) that the etomite team/copyright owner ceased operation in favor of a commercial venture similiar to the Mambo/Joomla mess situation.

I found the tight integration with SMF intriguing as integration headaches mentioned below are true - and the MODx guys appeared to put a lot of work into SMF integration - which has a lot of value for the people here.

We all need tools to put in our toolbox and I think MODx might be a good tool to complement SMF and TinyPortal.

There doesn't appear to be mass duplication of features between TP & MODx or a clash of styles/direction. Bloc says TP is more of a portal than a CMS and MODx claims to be more of a CMS than a Portal. Actually MODx claims to be a "Content Management Framework" - a hybrid CMS and web application framework - but that sounds like marketing spin for a CMS with heavy use of CSS/XHTML. 

Both TinyPortal and MODx seem to strive to solve a problem the most efficient way they can with solutions that are more "next gen" (Web2.0 - whatever that means) than other tools.  The two also seem to be in similar phases - both on the (b)leading edge close to a 1.0 launch with hooks into SMF 1.1 RC2.

Quote from: gerrymo on March 28, 2006, 07:16:29 PM
Not really relevant on a TP board though it? This would be better discussed over a SMF (http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php)

First, this topic is certainly "relevant enough" for chit-chat.

Second, I believe this MODx topic is orders of magnitude more relevant to TP than to SMF.  MODx and SMF have nearly nothing in common.

Third, I'm thinking this topic might be more relevant than I thought - maybe I hit a nerve - is MODx viewed as competition? There is no logical reason for a MOD to jump in and say this topic is not relevant when there are topics about cooking and flood damaged vehicles in "chit-chat". Why is this topic called out as irrelevant when cooking/flood damaged vehicles get a pass?

Quote from: iowamf on March 29, 2006, 09:08:27 AMThird, I'm thinking this topic might be more relevant than I thought - maybe I hit a nerve - is MODx viewed as competition? There is no logical reason for a MOD to jump in and say this topic is not relevant when there are topics about cooking and flood damaged vehicles in "chit-chat". Why is this topic called out as irrelevant when cooking/flood damaged vehicles get a pass?

Most certainly it is competition - but why care? It isn't like these things are being charged for. No one is making any money off of them. Bloc isn't selling the TP script and neither is MODx selling theirs.

I believe I might just have to try MODx tonight, just to see what it is all about.

A suggestion folks - don't put all of your eggs in the SMF basket. We've all witnessed something which was once free suddenly not being free anymore. The propaganda I see over at Simple Machines about being free and all sounds frighteningly similar (some nearly identical wording, even) to the claims made a number of years ago by another message board provider. Then one day, the much anticipated v2.0 came out with a price. And IBF is now more acceptable to the corporate world for interactive scripts.

phpBB is open script - as such, no one will ever suddenly charge for it, even though you could charge for a CD which included phpBB. You could write and design a portal for phpBB, include phpBB and charge $200 for the portal, while including phpBB as a bonus.

SMF is not open source. Instead, since it is based on php, it is visible source; open to anyone with a text editor. Still, Lewis Media has already been making noises over their ownership of the code. They are also very secretive about their future plans.

I was reading an article just the other day (I will have to dig it out) which predicted that the SMF script will go the way of IPB. IPB began as a free script. Then it was free only for personal use. Then there was the free trial of the full version. Now that all are charged for, you can only run a controlled demo.

Historically, these things have either been fully open-source or they eventually come with a price-tag. Get over it and be prepared for it. If you won't pay $150+ for IPB or vB now, when they offer three times the capability of SMF, will you pay the $150 for SMF down the road?

Well, if that day comes when SMF will be a paid software, I suspect a lot will leave. Other than that it has been stated many times exactly what Lewis Media is , and what its involvement in SMF are. I happen to think its a positive thing, that its protected against forks, and that versions are so controlled as it is, making rogue versions almost non-existant.

No need to paint the future so black. :)

I think people need to remember a couple of things here concerning moderators. We all have our own opinions. :) Gerrymo didn't think that it was appropriate. That is his opinion. I certainly don't think there is any harm with talking about other mods/portals/forums. No need to get uptight about someones opinion.

I have to agree with Twins to a certain point here. Things can happen with free software. Maybe this is why Unknown left? I remember him saying he wouldn't stick around with SMF if they ever moved away from the free market. I don't know.... But until then, I'm not going to worry about anything. I've got bigger fish to fry. And as Bloc so eloquently put it, no need to paint it black.

I wasn't intending to paint things so black - again, just being realistic. I remember a few years ago when the trade papers started making noise about Invision - either Matt would make it a commercial enterprise or he would be going under. He vehemently denied it until it happened. Now they are saying the same things about Lewis Media and SMF.

You couldn't talk about alternatives on the vB board, because it would hurt their sales.

All I am saying is to be ready - to be prepared. Don't invest everything you may have based your sites on in something which which may change later. Talking about alternatives is always good, as long as no one is getting hurt and reasonable comparisons are being made.

SMF is Open Source, just not Free Software according to the FSF's definition. There are other definitions than theirs..

Simple Machines License (http://www.simplemachines.org/about/license.php)

From that, we see the following, from section one, item d of the agreement:

QuoteAny Distribution of this Package, whether as a Modified Package or not, requires express written consent from Lewis Media.

That takes out any thought of "Open Source."

Visible source is different than open source.

Open source doesn't have this restriction. You may modify and distribute.

From the phpBB License (http://www.phpbb.com/support/license.php):

QuoteWe protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.

Yes, there are other definitions; anyone can fabricate a definition - but unlike you, my company has researched this thoroughly as to how the courts would view the concept of open source. Your definition is without merit, as far as North American or European courts are concerned.

If it does happen...I won't worry about it...I'll just keep whatever my last version was forever in that case.

Quote from: eldacar on March 30, 2006, 01:08:29 AM
SMF is Open Source, just not Free Software according to the FSF's definition. There are other definitions than theirs..

For more on this, you might want to see what Hiveminds says (http://www.hiveminds.co.uk/simple_machines_forum_is_not_free_or_open_source). Their analysis is much the same our legal advisors have told us in regard to offering SMF as a free feature to our clients.

The way the SMF license is written is a crafty way to not only retain ownership of the software, but also puts huge hooks into claims they could have in the future on any modifications, themes, etc. It is extremely dangerous to place your faith in it.

I am trying it out on a site where everything is mirrored to a database conversion that is run twice daily - but that site will return to a paid license before too long. Because of the SMF license, we have issued a warning to our clients to avoid SMF on any site where the traffic is critical or where your content cannot be duplicated easily.

Looking back further into Internet history, there was an older precedent - older than the IPB example. There was a company known as Infopop - it started out with a visible source product and it was free. It stayed free for a few years, then one day it was free no more. The problem was that Infopop threatened legal action against anyone making converters for the software which was known as OpenTopic, since they owned the license and copyright to the previously modifiable and themeable product. This forced the thousands of sites to buy OpenTopic, shut down or start over.

To this day, try to find a converter for OpenTopic. There are sites which have migrated to Groupee - still, the fees are high. When I ran OT sites, the fees for a medium sized site were over $1500 per year. There were other options which ran as high as $10,000 per. The least expensive was $99 per month. I had contracts to run seven of these boards.

Now will any of this happen with SMF? Maybe, maybe not - but if it isn't in the cards, why is their license agreement written the way it is? As one of my attorneys mentioned, "that is one of the slickest written traps I've seen in awhile."

Everyone's cruising along, getting and maintaining loyal members and contributors, then BOOM! No more, unless you pay. By the way, that mod you spent a year developing? It's ours and you'll have to pay for it. The theme you paid someone to create for you? That's ours, too. It'll be an extra $49.95 if you want to use it.

Before you tell me how great and safe and honest SMF is, why don't you take a copy down to your attorney and ask him if you should invest so much into it and what could happen. The people who actually own the software? You've never met them, nor will you ever meet them. So why would you trust them? Have you seen the building Lewis Media is in? There isn't much there that would engender trust in them for me.

You could trust them and flame me - then if it turns out I am wrong, you'll continue to flame me. But if I am correct.......

Many of you are talented in writing php. But most of you don't know your way around basic Web server operation - you certainly don't have a clue as to the legalities of it all. I don't either, so I pay for legal advice and counsel.

I am not saying to not use SMF. All I am saying is do not use it on anything you wouldn't mind completely losing overnight.

And that is the realistic viewpoint.

In a worst-case-scenario I guess this could happen..but that goes for a lot of things. You take a risk even with just using TP.

Maybe as being part of the team around SMF I feel different..but one of the reasons I put so much work into what I do, is because I trust SMF. If that turns I have been betting on the wrong horse in the long run, doesn't really matter...I hopefully will have created something people will have a use for and having fun doing it. And I do think most of the people behind SMF also thinks this way - none of them get paid, the server is paid for through the charter program, so there is just that one incentive of being part of something good and free.

About speculations on unknown's departure...that was not because of license issues at least. And I am happy to say his way of thinking lives on in SMF, his legacy code is a large part of what you think is "strange", and what I think is a stroke of genius. ;D

Its all relative.

Sorry about the speculation on Unknown, it was just a thought provoked by Twins because I found no comments at SMF as to the reason he left. I think he really was brilliant too, it was sad to see him go.

I for one will never be the type to totally dedicate my site to one particular piece of software in so much that I cannot move away from it without starting over. So really, I have no worries for any changes that may or may not occur with SMF. After reading many of the comments from the developers at SMF, if something does change they will lose many great users if they do.

Quote from: Bloc on March 30, 2006, 05:17:32 PMMaybe as being part of the team around SMF I feel different..but one of the reasons I put so much work into what I do, is because I trust SMF. If that turns I have been betting on the wrong horse in the long run, doesn't really matter...I hopefully will have created something people will have a use for and having fun doing it. And I do think most of the people behind SMF also thinks this way - none of them get paid, the server is paid for through the charter program, so there is just that one incentive of being part of something good and free.

That's just it, Bloc - I get this feeling you are having fun and you are doing it for others. This is why I have nothing but goodwill toward you. But remember, there were a number of team "members" in the dark and left behind with IPB/IBF went commercial. You're doing it for the fun of it and I am trying and testing it for the fun of it. But there are many who are staking a lot more than fun in their sites. Reputation, history, legacy, all at stake.

Quote from: Bloc on March 30, 2006, 05:17:32 PMhis legacy code is a large part of what you think is "strange", and what I think is a stroke of genius.

I have never said the legacy code is strange. What I've said is that the controls of SMF are strange, not intuitive and do not match up well with the competition.

Theming SMF is easier than it is on many message boards. Creating a mod is quite possibly simpler than on many. But to change a setting somewhere or get the software to do what you might want it to do or edit a member, it is light-years behind.

And for someone to continually claim SMF is open source is crazy - it is no more open source than is vBulletin or Invision.

Some of the settings are pretty strange, I for example don't understand why Karma is based on a single setting, rather than simply being a permission. But that doesn't mean that the settings and admin controls will stay this way..

I for 1 am no longer happy with phpbb and SMF is the only REAL alternative out there that does at least what phpbb does.. and more in a lot of areas.. phpbb is not as secure as SMF but there again they do have a lot more people using it.. and as such are more prone to attacks and people discovering ways to exploit holes in their OPEN SOURCE .. there are many more modules out thewre to for phpbb and thats where a lot of secutity issues lie.. the more mods you install the more prone to holes in the security..

If SFM ever to start to charge then that won't be a supprise to me.. its a dam good piece of software.. and what better way to build up and get people to let them know what features they want than to make it free.. then when you have a good share of the market to start selling it.. its good business sence.. however I for one can't afford to pay.. so if that time ever happens it looks like i'll be forced to go back to phpbb (hopefully by then they'll have phpbbv3 out.. which btw they've spent over a year on going backwards and forwards...

I know that there are other free foeum softwares out there but none of them stack up to phpbb or smf.. i will really be sad if and when they start charging for SMF

Then again by that time others may have started their own you beaut forum software for free.. this is what makes the world go round..

and why should software do things the same way.. they arn't writting clones of each other.. (or are they.. LOL )  I hate IPB and VBull admin.. and templating systems.. its vastly different to phpbb's .. but each to their own..

At the moment I'm happiest with smf followed by phpbb..

As for portals I'm pleased how tinyportal is shaping up.. but no portal / cms software is the be all and end all.. none are ever exactly what your after (this has been my experience for years..) the only way to get exactly what you want is to write it yourself(if your good enough) or pay someone to do it for you.. even then you still mightn't get exactly what you want..

what My idea of a good portal / cms system is is to give the end user controle of what appears where and how.. from the admins side its to present the data that they require in a manner to best suit the end user without having to spend months on changing things when they update or change their contwent or design.. and these days a forum is an integeral part of doing that.. its no good having a great looking site if your fighting with any part of it to get it to do what you want