Talk:Cyclos

Notability and sources

None of the given sources are usable for establishing notability, and only the first is a (possible) relevant reliable source TEDickey (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Licence issue

This article stated that Cyclos is free software: the licence stated is [GNU General Public License], which is indeed true up to version 3 (still available on sf.net, but not actively developed). Since version 4 it is proprietary. Firstly, the Cyclos price list shows a limitation of 300 users for the "Free" version, but this is "Cyclos 4 PRO", the apparently only available version from the official website www.cyclos.org. Secondly, when actually trying to download Cyclos from www.cyclos.org, one needs to register and comply with a restrictive licence. I changed the article accordingly.

- It seems clear that the latest version on SourceForge under GPL is 3.7.3: https://sourceforge.net/projects/cyclos/files/ - this source supports your claim that there is a version 4. As of this writing the latest version is 4.6.1: http://www.cyclos.org/faq - this source supports your claim that there are gratis and paid versions available on their hosting: https://license.cyclos.org/ - However, it's not clear that this means the code for versions 4x are not under GPL. Do you have a source for this? --Danylstrype (talk) 10:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

At the moment this article is included in the category "Free finance software". Should we remove it from this category since newer version are proprietary or not since there are free software versions available (which the company claims are good though inferior compared to the newest, proprietary version)? Hulten (talk) 21:45, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

- One way of deciding is to investigate whether anyone is still using 3.7.3 or earlier in production systems. If not, then the 3x line is effectively obsolete, and the article should be removed from the "Free finance software" category. - Another way it to find out whether version 3.7.3 can still be successfully used. If not, then there is no argument for keeping it in that category. At the point where version 3.7.3 can no longer be reliably and securely operated due to changes in underlying dependencies, even if the relevant versions of all dependencies are packages with it in a container, then 3.7.3 would be considered obsolete. At this point, only the 4x versions are live, and the article should be removed from that category. --Danylstrype (talk) 10:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cyclos. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://project.cyclos.org/mobile-banking
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120328114321/http://www.sunflower.ch/index.php?p=site4_cyclos&l=en to http://www.sunflower.ch/index.php?p=site4_cyclos&l=en
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120511215702/http://ccmag.net/cyclos/3/6 to http://ccmag.net/cyclos/3/6
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110929161553/http://www.esrad.org.uk/ccs_software to http://www.esrad.org.uk/ccs_software

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)