Credit Me

[taylorotwell]

Since this framework basically just steals all the code and style I spent so much time building, you need to at least credit me as a co-author and creator of this framework. Thanks.

[dcblogdev]

You're right, you deserve to be credited for your work, not all of your code has been used but I take your point, no disrespect was intended I should have credited you as soon as the first Laravel component was used.

[taylorotwell]

I still don't have credit.

[LuckyCyborg]

In respect for Laravel's MIT licensing, as we reuse some parts from this Software, there are the following files:

https://github.com/nova-framework/system/blob/3.0/LICENSE.taylorotwell
https://github.com/nova-framework/system/blob/4.0/LICENSE.taylorotwell

Both files having the following content:

The MIT License (MIT)

Copyright (c) <Taylor Otwell>

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in
all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
THE SOFTWARE.

In the same time, the Nova Framework is itself distributed under MIT License, then there should not be any licensing conflicts.

I hope we will agree here that everything is check and green as licensing!

Finally, permit me to explain what happen here:

I have in maintenance a huge amount of sites made in Laravel 4.2. I can say that I'm huge fan of this Software, in particular of this 4.x series.

I know, in a perfect World, every six months the owners will pay for rewriting their sites, as your unleashed inventive imagination dictate.

But we live in an imperfect World, and they do not accept even to think about rewriting the sites two times per year.

How someone from the Laravel Team decided to put down the Laravel 4.2 in the near future, like you Sir probably know already, I haven no choice but to use the rights given to me by the Laravel MIT License, to write and maintain in future a Framework compatible, first of all, with selected APIs from Laravel 4.2.

[ghost]

Whilst you are perfectly within your rights @LuckyCyborg, it still would've been 'decent' of you to include on the README.md that this framework has been extended from the Laravel framework to implement bespoke functionality.

[rhclayto]

It's right there: Copyright (c)

And you can't steal MIT code.

Whadda baby.

[br0kenb1nary]

Not tossing @taylorotwell a credit note for code that you clearly had no real involvement in creating shows your limitations as a programmer. You lack the key components of a programmer - the drive, the desire for creativity, and the want to build something fresh. @taylorotwell gives credit to all of the components used in the Laravel framework both in speaking about Laravel as well as throughout Laravel. All of the components can be found in the Laravel composer.json file under "require". Interestingly enough, your framework (although by your own admission copies other work) has no requirements in its composer.json. I.e you lack any ability and creativity. But on the plus side, you have proven you have the ability to copy and paste.

See, that is me also giving credit where It's due.

[LuckyCyborg]

@br0kenb1nary

All of the components can be found in the Laravel composer.json file under "require". Interestingly enough, your framework (although by your own admission copies other work) has no requirements in its composer.json. I.e you lack any ability and creativity.

Dear Sir, you talk while superficially looking in a wrong place! And that's really interestingly enough!

Even this issue it is in a wrong place, as in https://github.com/nova-framework/framework , because excluding that we assume that @taylorotwell invented the MVC concept, in this repository is no "Laravel code" present, because it is one of the applications, more specifically the one with demos and examples, for our rookies to learn to use Nova Framework.

Also, what we call bare application, the one recommended for development, and not for learning, it is on https://github.com/nova-framework/app and also it does not contain "Laravel code".

Where is the "Laravel code" for real? There: https://github.com/nova-framework/system

And also there, into https://github.com/nova-framework/system is present something, much more than a credit line: the complete Laravel's MIT License bought to us by @taylorotwell

To note that we already done, long time ago, exactly what the Laravel's MIT License asked us.

Oh, to enlighten you, if you look into https://github.com/nova-framework/system you will see into composer.json the following require section on the stable branch:

    "require": {
        "php": ">=5.6.0",
        "danielstjules/stringy": "~1.8",
        "symfony/console": "3.1.*",
        "symfony/finder": "3.1.*",
        "symfony/http-foundation": "3.1.*",
        "symfony/http-kernel": "3.1.*",
        "symfony/process": "3.1.*",
        "symfony/routing": "3.1.*",
        "symfony/var-dumper": "3.1.*",
        "stack/builder": "^1.0",
        "doctrine/inflector": "1.1.*",
        "nesbot/carbon": "^1.21",
        "swiftmailer/swiftmailer": "^5.4",
        "monolog/monolog": "^1.19",
        "predis/predis": "1.1.*",
        "filp/whoops": "^2.1"
    },

Interestingly enough, for you?

Now, lets compare Nova 3 versus Laravel 4.2 applications:

    "require": {
        "php": ">=5.6.0",
        "nova-framework/system": "~3.0",
        "almasaeed2010/adminlte": "~2.0",
        "twbs/bootstrap": "^3.3"
    },

Versus the Laravel's

    "require": {
        "laravel/framework": "4.2.*"
    },

Finally, commenting in you claim about "I.e you lack any ability and creativity.", great words, great accuses, but the truth is more grounded than you think:

We need badly a well maintained Laravel 4.2 for the years to come, while your Gods said that it is time that that Laravel 4.2 to be put down in the near future, so we taken the stick!

That's all, Sir!

That code about you fiercely talk is about to be dumped on the recycle bin, while we need it badly!

[ZhaoLin1457]

I can not believe my eyes! Really? This thread is surreal!

What I see is an illustrious programmer, bullying a small project, which is struggling to find a solution to a very real problem for them, and who dared to share their work with others.

What I see is a pack of Zealots, who have not the slightest idea about licenses, but they comment about lending.

I have a simple question for the OP: Laravel is really released under the MIT license or it is a proprietary software?

This thread makes me confused about the true licensing of Laravel and I'm worried about legal risks of using Laravel's in my projects.

[huenisys]

Laravel is a proprietary software.

[mikezange]

As far as I can see the Laravel Framework is release under MIT?

The 4.2 branch license: https://github.com/laravel/framework/blob/4.2/LICENSE.txt, which clearly states there are no restrictions apart from including the copyright which has been done, so there are no legal issues here, just decency ones.

However, I do agree with giving people credit for their work so I think "Based on the 4.2 version of the Laravel Framework" would suffice?

[LuckyCyborg]

That is written as headline on https://novaframework.com/

Right on homepage.