I could just do that yeah - I will have to look into it some more :)
But yes, the IonCube tools do allow for the copyright notices to be
left unencrypted, as I thought.
The client is more likely to sue us if they manage to break something.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
Couldnt you just encrypt the App related files (objects, controllers
and views etc.) which you created within the Cake framework specific to
your application? At least then there is no copyright issues as it is
your code.
That way the client simply cant modify the application you have built
for
Hi guys,
I'm working as a web developer now, and I've been trying to convince
the directors of the company that using some open-source libraries to
build our sites would be a good move. I've almost managed to convince
them that having a template engine is a good idea - with demonstrations
of
you can sell your cake-based apps for money, but you are not allowed to
encrypt/remove copyright/... from the cake files.
if your company doesnt know what the benefits of a framework are, i
wonder what kind of management is leading that company. I can't
imagine any software company *not* using
You can use Cake, AND Smarty!
What are your other options to be honest? Write it all from scratch?
Use another framework?
Don't forget open source means community, and the Cake community is
growing rapidly, so most problems you'll encounter others have
encountered. Cake is also growing
Luckily, I've been using Cake myself for the past couple of months - so
I'm about as much as we're likely to need for the moment :)
The other options are: keep doing things the same way they've always
been done here (we have a function library, but the functions it
includes are pretty specific
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
you can sell your cake-based apps for money, but you are not allowed to
encrypt/remove copyright/... from the cake files.
...even from files from 'app' directory, which is quite annoying as it
(besides other things) little bit complicate auto generated
documentation
This might unfortunately be a sticking point.
We're in a position with one of our clients where we simply can't trust
them not to tamper with the code we've written for them. This would be
ok, but anything that goes wrong with it they blame us for even when
it's their fault. So, we use IonCube
On 10/17/06, MrTufty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This might unfortunately be a sticking point.
We're in a position with one of our clients where we simply can't trust
them not to tamper with the code we've written for them. This would be
ok, but anything that goes wrong with it they blame us
MrTufty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
We're in a position with one of our clients where we simply can't trust
them not to tamper with the code we've written for them. This would be
ok, but anything that goes wrong with it they blame us for even when
it's their fault. [...]
Why not checksum
Sadly, not my decision to make... although that checksum idea might not
be a bad one for future reference, I'll put that forward to the
directors. I don't think we'll be dumping them though, they really are
our main client at the moment and their business is worth a huge
amount. Plus they'd
On 10/17/06, MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MrTufty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...]
We're in a position with one of our clients where we simply can't trust
them not to tamper with the code we've written for them. This would be
ok, but anything that goes wrong with it they blame us for
You're telling me... I've been pushing the need since I started here to
finish up a couple of other projects that are nearly ready to go
online... trouble is this client takes up so much of our time, with us
being only a small team, that we don't really get chance to tackle
anything else.
I'll
IANAL, but I think that the no encryption/modification restrictions
apply to an application that you're either selling or giving away. If
you supply your client with an un-modified Cake Core, you've lived up
to the license. Anything they do after that is for their own use.
There's nothing
I'll ask gwoo to weigh in here, since he's the IP attorney, but I'm
pretty sure the only stipulations with the MIT License are with regard
to the copyright notice. So if you wanted to go to the trouble, you
could remove the copyright from the files, encode them, then add the
copyright back at
Ok. I believe the IonCube tools allow for copyright notices to be left
unencoded anyway, I'd have to check the documentation to be sure but
I'm sure it mentioned something along those lines.
On Oct 17, 3:51 pm, nate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'll ask gwoo to weigh in here, since he's the IP
16 matches
Mail list logo
