Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm curious why you decided not to use Aloha Editor, since it is also able to produce clean markup. Disclosure: I'm one of the Aloha Editor developers.


Download size is one big factor for me.

http://cdn.aloha-editor.org/latest/lib/aloha.js 1.1MB!

http://imperavi.com/js/redactor/redactor.js 168KB (odd, it is an encrypted version)

The actual minified 8.1.0 version that you get after giving them a fake email address is 41KB.


The aloha core is 239KB (minified but not gzipped). Plugins can be anywhere from 5KB to 50KB. The version on the CDN includes about 30 plugins.

I expect the size would be around 300KB if only the basic plugins are included.

Still, it's a lot bigger than redactor - point taken.


Having a slightly larger size is a non-issue for people who aren't willing to spend at least the 100 dollars...


Hi deliminator! The Aloha Editor is great. I was poking around in your source the other day and noticed that it doesn't seem like it's received much active development for the past few months. Is it at a stage where you expect future changes to just be bug fixes, or is there still active development planned?

Just curious. Thanks for providing a great tool to the community!


The latest big development was porting the UI from ExtJs to jQuery UI. This had some benefits concerning licensing and code size.

Drupal is interested in integrating Aloha, and we are currently discussing several improvements that would be necessary for them. Have a look at the issue tracker. I think the UI À la carte and accessibility will be the next big user-visible developments.


Primary reason was licensing. This was a year ago.


The License was changed recently to GPLv2.


Isn't GPLv2 still problematic for websites, unless you want to use GPLv2 for the rest of the website as well?


Before the GPLv2 we had the AGPL, which made it explicit that you had to divulge any server side code.

Now, with the GPLv2, it is possible to use Aloha freely in most websites/webapps. You don't distribute your website/webapp and therefore are not bound by the GPLv2 to divulge your website's source code.

The GPLv2 _would_ take effect if you distribute your website in the traditional sense - a package that someone can run himself.

(IANAL and can't speak for Gentics etc.)


Thanks, I'd forgotten about the distribution clause in the GPLv2, so if you don't distribute binary or source, it is not viral.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: