As a plugin developer, I think it is really up to me to decide on how the code is set, isn’t it?
The only requirement that exists to have the plugin here in terms of features is to be able to do basic things it is expected to do. For a ticket system like WATS, it would be mean to be able to post a ticket which the free release fully allows you to do.
Then how the plugin options page is designed and what is included or not into it in the free release is really a developer decision. It isn’t mentioned in any of the plugin developer guidelines that you shouldn’t put any mention to the paying release.
So I won’t correct this, I acknowledge that we have different interpretations of plugins rules and you would probably prefer to get the paying release clean and free here. But this isn’t possible because I need to be able to sustain the plugin development and support and based on the time it takes, I can’t do it for free 🙂
Then, based on this offending comment and the other ones you regularly post about other plugins, I would strongly suggest you to revise your mindset. WordPress is a community where everybody is supposed to bring something positive. I hugely contributed to it by posting some free and paying plugins. WATS was downloaded more than 50.000 times which gives you an idea on how many people took advantage of it for free! So don’t come and tell me what I need to do, it isn’t a positive approach and you aren’t the gatekeeper here. Rather ask yourself what positive you could do for the community, this would be much better approach…
Moderator
Jan Dembowski
(@jdembowski)
Forum Moderator and Brute Squad
This part is correct.
You place a link to your website and name of your plugin on the home page and you do not have a setting that allows the removal of that footer link. According to WP rules, if you have such a link and name of your plugin it is supposed to be defaulted to “OFF” and the option for the admin to turn it on.
See the plugin guidelines.
http://wordpress.org/plugins/about/guidelines/
10. The plugin must not embed external links on the public site (like a “powered by” link) without explicitly asking the user’s permission. Any such options in the plugin must default to NOT show the link.
This part really is incorrect based on that.
So I won’t correct this, I acknowledge that we have different interpretations of plugins rules and you would probably prefer to get the paying release clean and free here.
But I’m not on the plugin team (that team works hard) so I’ll just send them an email to plugins [at] wordpress.org and ask them. If it’s a problem then they’ll let the plugin author know.
Edit: The offending lines are these.
https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wats/trunk/wats.php#L397
https://plugins.trac.wordpress.org/browser/wats/trunk/wats-template.php#L152
My comments weren’t related to the link but to the premium options reference in the free release. I will certainly not touch those ones as it would then require the maintenance of two separate streams which I don’t want to.
Then it is clear that the link is here to credit for the development work for part. And to be honest, this is a very small credit versus what the plugin brings in for free in terms of features.
Then, it is easy to remove it if you don’t want it.
Also on another part, a lot of users are happy with that link as it allows them to have a quick reference of who did the plugin and then contact easily if they have questions or find documentation directly without having to ask who did it…
Reference to how many users are happy with that link is nowhere in my post. So, that can’t be another part. That is your justification for putting a backlink on websites.
Sure, I can hack your plugin and remove the link. I can (or should) be able to go into the code and remove the limitations (if you followed the rules). But upon update, I will have to hack the plugin again. That isn’t the way it is supposed to be done.
I recognize and respect your desire to make money off of your work. That isn’t the issue I raised. The issue I raised is that the plugin the way it is being presented and distributed violates the WP rules for plugins.
I will default to Jan and the plugins team. Thanks Jan.
I wasn’t referring to your post while mentioning that a lot of users didn’t had any issue with the link. I don’t see why I would change the plugin just to make you happy while it was already downloaded almost 55.000 times and you are the first one to complain about this. Basically, I get your comment but I am sorry, I won’t touch the plugin code just to make you happy as it would potentially disappoint a lot of users. So if you don’t want the link, just place an order for the premium release. Other users have no issue with that.
With regards to the warning on the features, it was a complaint in the past from a lot of users that they weren’t clear on what was available or not in the free release in terms of features. So I have added these warnings to make it clearer. So there is no way I will remove those now. If you aren’t happy with those, place an order for the premium release, it doesn’t cost a fortune!
The plugin doesn’t violate anything. And again, you aren’t the gatekeeper in anyway here. I believe you are violating the spirit of WordPress community by coming here and making such bad statements about others work! I would be happy to see you contributing at the same level as I had, would be way more beneficial for the community than what you are doing here!
Definition of Shareware:
Shareware is software that you can use on a trial basis before paying for it. Unlike freeware, shareware often has limited functionality … Once you pay for a shareware program, the program is fully functional …
Sounds pretty much like what is being done here.
Actually, you keep referring to my negative comments. Please.. I’m not making any bad comments about your work. And because you don’t see my contributions as positive for the rest of the community doesn’t make it so. Whether or not I have authored something does not mean I don’t contribute. So, stop trying to build yourself up by comparison. That’s not what this is about. I raise the issue of a violation of the rules. The rest of the stuff you are saying is just stuff to make an argument that is already going to be decided by someone else who is looking at the rules, not whether or not you or I are the better person or the most active on WP forums or plugins creation.
We are both part of a community. That community has rules. If my comments violate the rules, I will be dealt with accordingly. If your plugin violates the rules, you will be dealt with accordingly. That’s just the way it works.
So, since this has already been sent to the people who make those decisions, let’s let them decide. Not the 50,000 who have downloaded your product. 50,000 backlinks is quite impressive. Nice job.
You are mixing up completely… A shareware usually is limited in time or in number of events you can do. WATS free release is completely free and doesn’t have any restriction! You are just misleading here! It is just that there is a premium release that contains additional features. But the free release is fully functional and allows to submit unlimited number of tickets.
Looking at your past track of comments on these forums, it is clear that you are acting more against the community of plugin developers than anything else! I am sorry but this is a fact, just read your past comments!
Your comment is nothing but noise. Again, step up and write a plugin that does what WATS is doing, work to support it for 50.000 downloads. And then we will talk again together. Talking is so easy, making is something different…
Please stop with your attempt to claim I am not contributing. In fact, there are ample requests I have seen in the WP forums for people to help to rid this community of plugins that violate the rules.
Whether or not I have a record of giving five stars or one star, I give honest evaluations based on what I find. You have already been told that you are wrong in your position by someone who is a part of the mods here. Are they not contributing positively?
There is no need for you to continue to try to put me down for my comments. If I violate a rule, as I have said before, then I will be dealt with. This conversation is going nowhere. The plugin has been referred to the people who make the decisions.
I don’t have to reveal the behind the scenes activities I am involved with that contribute to this community to be qualified to evaluate a piece of software I installed on my website and found to be in violation of the rules and post a review of it.
You have said you won’t change it, so my review stands. It’s that simple.
Now, let’s leave this to the people who are going to make the decision on whether or not your process of forcing your link and your information into the frontend of websites is violating the rules.
And you are partially correct with regard to shareware. Some shareware does limit based on time. The rest limits functionality. Which in your plugin you clearly state that certain of the options that are able to be checked do not work unless someone pays for your software. That is limited functionality.
Argue all you want. That’s what you are doing. You have admitted it and then turned around and attacked me for my record claiming I am not a positive contributor of this community. For what? a dollar sign? Oh well…
You are just trolling here man 🙂
Check out your previous post. It is evident that you contribution is limited to attacking others work. Useless.
Won’t argue more on what you have just said, it is loss of time. You just don’t realize that what you are doing is negative and non sense. Thanks for your 1-star rating, I take this as a positive rating coming from someone like you.
This is not really a productive conversation.
The original poster is correct about our rules with regards to credit links. The author has been emailed with details, and the plugin has been temporarily suspended for violations of our rules. The plugin will be relisted if and when it has been corrected, as per the usual procedure.
In the meantime, this conversation is not helpful. Closed.
