Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Notifications
Mark all as read
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Parent

Can codidact be used separately from the codidact network with custom local user management?

+6
−0

I am a research assistant at a technical university and have been tasked by our chair to find a software to host our internal Q&As on.

My collegues and I have been doing small code snippets and lengthy calculations and made frequent use of the stack exchange network, so it felt natural to us to use their product or a similarly structured software like codidact.

However, we ran into some issues with stack exchange for teams, as our university mandates, that we use only self/locally hosted solutions. With this requirement, we are not elegible for the discouted stack exchange price, which they offer for educational purposes.

I have been setting up a codidact testing environment on my machine, and I noticed only after completing the setup, that while the site is running locally, the user management is not. I would rather reuse our own existing authentication and credentials framework.

So my question is this: Can codidact (when locally hosted) be used separately from the codidact network with our own user management?

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

Hi! Developer here. When you say the user management is not running locally, what do you mean? Users ... (1 comment)
Post
+1
−7

Yes, you can.

Usually, when people uses my product I become happy. If you just clone the git repository than I will say to put your website under CC BY 3.0 (your site is copy-paste of our code) or CC BY SA 3.0. I have some suggestion (it may not be for you either).

I have recently seen a person who were trying to host his own site using "our" code. As far as I know, that person don't have much more idea of ruby-on-rails and mysql. Although, he was trying to build a site with our code. Whenever he faces problem he must come to us cause he doesn't have idea of ruby-on-rails.

Sometimes, you may ask that page A isn't working properly in your site but, it's working here; How can I fix that? Literally, we don't have any idea what you are doing with your code (our code in your system). For that reason, whenever asking question in Collab remember to show us your code.

ruby-on-rails is much more harder than people thinks. Once of my friend in CD said,"After QPixel, I have really hated Ruby. Being a JavaScript developer is a miracle." He was referring to ruby-on-rails rather than ruby. If you don't have any experience with ruby-on-rails than don't use QPixel.

Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

2 comment threads

What does this have to do with the question? (7 comments)
That sounds like a reasonable assessment of my situation and I value your advice. To make sure I unde... (4 comments)

Comments on Can codidact be used separately from the codidact network with custom local user management?

What does this have to do with the question?
Canina‭ wrote about 1 year ago:

It seems to me that the only part to this answer that really addresses the question is the heading. OP claims to have been able to set up QPixel locally, so what you are talking about seems to not even apply. Also, what does specific licensing terms for content have to do with user authentication on an internal, locally hosted site?

Sorry, but this whole answer feels like a long non-sequitur.

deleted user wrote about 1 year ago:

I think (he have successfully build qpixel in his local system. Now, he wants to build a site with QPixel code). that's why I said that.

mw88‭ wrote about 1 year ago:

Even if I didn't ask about that, Istiak's answer adressed the fact whether (and possibly under which circumstances) we are allowed to fork the QPixel code. Moreover, he voiced concerns about my ability to implement this, which is valid, as I was asking (and hoping for) an easy setup just like any regular wordpress/drupal/phpBB/etc. site.

So, to me, his answer adressed the technical posibility to do so, while adressing and adding insight on my own incapability to do it on my own.

Derek Elkins‭ wrote about 1 year ago:

mw88‭ Except the advice given on using the code is incorrect. The relevant licensing information is in the LICENSE file in the source code. In particular, QPixel is distributed under the GNU Affero GPL license (AGPL). Creative Commons licenses are not designed for code and rarely used for it. They certainly aren't being used for QPixel's source code. You should read the license yourself, but, briefly, if you host a site using a modified version of QPixel then you must make the source of the modified version available under the AGPL. Using CC-BY 3.0 or CC-BY-SA 3.0 doesn't really make sense and is definitely not adequate nor necessary. Istiak is not in a position to grant you a different license.

Canina‭ wrote about 1 year ago:

Adding to what Derek Elkins‭ wrote above, while I am not a lawyer, for deleted user (or anyone else) to actually make the qpixel source code available under a different license would almost certainly be copyright infringement by way of offering something under terms not granted by the copyright holders.

That said, the content license for things which are hosted on and served by a qpixel instance, is an entirely different matter. The set of licenses available for posts is configurable; I don't know exactly where in the software, but that set is not fixed, and we've had some discussion here on Codidact on which licenses should be offered as choices. (Try searching Meta for "license".) If you want to host a qpixel instance that only allows the choice of, say, CC0 and CC BY-NC-ND, or CC BY-SA and the GFDL, or GFDL and MIT, or just CC0, or whichever other set you want to offer, that is entirely your choice.

deleted user wrote about 1 year ago:

Canina‭ Does MIT, Apache and other open-source allows to do copywrite "things"?

Edit :

COPYRIGHT
       Copyright  ©  2020  Free Software Foundation, Inc.  License GPLv3+: GNU
       GPL version 3 or later <https://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>.
       This is free software: you are free  to  change  and  redistribute  it.
       There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.

found it from manual entry :rofl:

Canina‭ wrote about 1 year ago:

deleted user Absent copyright (I assume you meant copyright and not copywrite), generalizing somewhat, anyone can do anything with a work. In the presence of copyright and without an explicit license, again generalizing, only the copyright holder can do anything with a work. Copyright-based licenses allow the copyright holder to grant (some subset of or all) rights normally reserved to the copyright holder to another person or entity. A license builds on top of copyright and is dependent on copyright for its enforcement; a license is not a foundation for copyright.