Contributors mailing list archives
contributors@odoo-community.org
Browse archives
Re: Results of the 2015 Contribution Survey
by
cocopapa
Hi Maxime
Thanks Maxime for clarifying Dominiqes position and I am really happy that he is NOT a member or contributor of OCA.
I actually thought so that he is not a member of OCA as he seems to be 100% supporting open source and not trying to get in positions you just moved all your OCA members and contributors in. You are selling all of them to Odoo!!! Open your eyes now!
IMHO Dominique really brings it to the point!
Those OCA people which were sitting in that meeting seem to be either partners of ODOO S.A. or getting other benefits from them to make such decisions like written in your post. They don't seem to have used their brains to think ahead for future of the community.
"
AGPLv3 is not suitable for a CMS whereas LGPLv3 is"
Sorry but this is complete nonsense - LGPL is even worse for a CMS - one reason why most of CMS which are used mostly are actually GPL!!! Have a look how many well known and widely used CMS are actually LGPL!
Nevertheless, both parties agreed as well to protect the end user against license related legal proceedings. AGPLv3 constraints should apply to the developers of modules, not end-users.
Nor OCA nor ODOO S.A. can twist the AGPL v.3 License like they want.
If there is ONE and even ONLY ONE module which is under AGPL license in Odoo 9 and the site is accessible publicly and USERS can interact with it through a network, than the source code of the COMPLETE site (as even Fabien Pincaers just mentioned in another Thread some days ago) has to be published publicly so that people can study the source-code.
It is the USER who interacts with the site and NOT the developer who mixes perhaps any kind of licenses in his developments.
We agreed that an end-user can run Enterprise Edition Proprietary modules and AGPLv3 modules together if said modules do not depend on each other and depend only on core LGPLv3 modules. In other words, any module must be compatible and respect the license of its dependencies defined in the “depends” key of its manifest file.
What you are doing here is nothing else than illegal! It is against law!
OCA and ODOO S.A. have to follow licenses the same way like any other developer who works with code published under AGPL v.3 has to follow it.
The end-user cannot be held responsible of the choice of license from the developer. The later is fully responsible to properly license his/her work.
This is also totally wrong and in a law suite especially in Europe or US you will have really problems. The AGPL v.3 license is NOT talking at all about developers but about USERS who interact with a certain site through a computer network. In other words "website" is the actual problem as here all kind of people will interact with the code.
Now more and more companies will use Odoo also to create their website and there shops.
Responsible for the site is in ALL cases the OWNER of a website and the one actually mentioned in the imprint of the website.
He will be the one getting into trouble, not the developer! It is the job of the website owner to ensure that license agreements get met. If he wants that developer follow those, than he has to put that in a contract with that certain developer or developing company. And even than he will be the one being contacted by the user of a website.
In some countries als HOSTERS will be taken into account! Similar to forum posts and other stuff happening on websites. So HOSTERS and OWNERS of ODOO websites should be aware that the OCA Position will bring them likely into legal problems!
What OCA is promoting here is nothing else than License infringement.
You as OCA are not the FSF or the legal body who wrote the AGPL License!
This is after all what has meanwhile written here and what gets also clarified through Dominique Chabords post just a joke and ALL developers and developing companies should be warned to first read what the OCA actually does with Community code!
Customers all around the world should actually avoid companies which collaborate with OCA or ODOO S.A. as they might get into legal problems in their countries by following them blind.
In other words:
Odoo is a great System if used in its Community Version after lots of stuff which Odoo S.A. has introduced to the code has been erased or at least disabled. Recently I found one company in Germany actually http://myodoo.de is providing such a clean Odoo version! And also Yelizariev is offering lots of tools in his github to debrand and disable critical stuff in ODOO Community Version. He just changed many modules from LGPL and AGPL actually to be GPL v.3!
I think people like him or Dominique who seem to be very Open Source oriented as he also provides Tryton beside Odoo have long time realised already what is going on in OCA.
It also would mean that labels like:
Bronze, Silver, Gold or Platinum Partner could be simply be interpreted as a level those companies might committing license infringements of AGPL. Customers should take that not as a trust worthy label as it might be just the opposite of it!
It is so sad to see that OCA who always says they will take care for the community actually don't care at all about her!
I really hope there will be a group of people who will start building an ODOO Community body which does not at all depend on ODOO S.A. like OCA does. I know that especially Brazilian Developers have a very serious problem with that license change to AGPL and I guess also with that point of view like you posted in that blog post.
Nevertheless I think this whole License issue with Odoo should be discussed in public places and not on an internal mailinglist, so that customers all around the world get informed about what is going on and that OCA and ODOO S.A. work hand in hand by promoting license infringements.
I am very disappointed at that point about the OCA position. Sorry - but I guess that many others feel the same way right now!
Kind reagrds
Cori
Hello Cori,Please find below the list of current Board Members:
- Joël Grand-Guillaume, Camptocamp (C2C)
- Eric Caudal, Elico Corporation
- Stéphane Bidoul, Acsone
- Maxime Chambreuil, Savoir-faire Linux (SFL)
- Sylvain Le Gal
- Luc Maurer, Camptocamp
- Sébastien Beau, Akretion
- Pedro M. Baeza
- Alexandre Fayolle, Camptocamp
Dominique Chabord is neither a member nor a contributor of the OCA.The license has been debated long enough last year. I understand you were not part of it. So I suggest you take a look in the mailing list discussions and the blog post on the OCA website:If you have additional information to justify re-opening the debate, please share them.If you are not happy with the OCA decision on this matter, I encourage you to join the OCA Board, so you will be able to take decisions and explain them to the community.Regards,2016-01-15 5:23 GMT+01:00 Cocopapa <cocopapa@gmail.com>:Hi Maximeyou wrote:Please share yours.I think you are completely missing the point what is really the major problem with OCA!No time is for sure no real answer to those problems but I think what Dominique Chabord of SiSalp brought up in another post hits really the point.BUT, OCA has decided, as a shared-copyright holder of all OCA AGPL modules to allow proprietary modules along with OCA AGPL modules with Odoo 9, provided the dependency between proprietary and AGPL is not explicitly documented in __openerp__.py of the proprietary module ;-). That means for me that OCA grants the permission for license violation on all OCA AGPL modules.It brought up a very serious concern and verified many concerns already made by others on the mailing-lists in the past years.Who is the OCA really?Who is the actual legal body of the OCA that such statements like of Dominique Chabord can be made public!The fact that OCA grants permission for license violations is IMHO a criminal act if that gets even promoted like that publicly.What does the C in OCA really stands for?I thought the OCA helps to secure AGPL v.3 developers interests, but now we are very very confused and even more sceptical than before about the future of a Free and Open Source Odoo Community Version after OCA promotes license violations and formally grants the violation right to any developer which means also to ODOO S.A. so they don't need to follow any licenses as they get fully backed by the OCA.---Under those circumstances I am really worried about the future of a feature rich Odoo Community version. I actually would even recommend all developers who love and work for a Free Open Sourced Odoo Community Version to form a new Entity which does not get influenced by OCA or ODOO S.A. . Under those circumstances it is really no wonder that not more people like to publish their code under OCA, as they would open it up for multiple license violations. For sure for us OCA is an absolute no go after the statement which Dominique just made. I am really sorry for that!I hope many other will help to form a new organisation which is not influenced or depending on ODOO S.A.. OCA seems to be only a branch of them to keep the community down. We discussed this already with some other friends and developers and came to the point that there is really the need to find a new way for the community to interact with each other without fear that the OCA or ODOO S.A. is promoting License violations.With kind regardsCoriOn Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Maxime Chambreuil <maxime.chambreuil@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote:Hello,The survey also shows it was answered mostly by current contributors and mostly developers. It also shows that we can't ask more to those people (no time).I tend to think we should focus on organizing events and encourage more new people to join and contribute, but that's my personal analysis.Please share yours.----- Le 14 Jan 16, à 9:08, Liana Baciu <lb@oerp.ca> a écrit :This is what happens when you don’t drink coffee, I left out sections specifically aimed at eliminating barriers and making contributions more effective.
It’s hard to comment on these because they specifically ask what can be done better, but not how urgently or strongly the change is needed. Some people may be suggesting something just because they’re asked. But it’s an interesting contrast to the graphs which were saying that people are quite competent with git, etc. I’m curious how other people interpret these answers together…
Liana Baciu
416.272.3218
lb@oerp.caOERP Canada
647.478.6811
www.oerp.caIMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is intended only for the use of the Person(s) to whom it was addressed. It may contain information which is privileged & confidential. Any dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message, or any of its contents or attachments by any person other than the intended recipient may constitute a breach of civil or criminal law and is strictly prohibited. If you are NOT the intended recipient please contact the sender and dispose of this email as soon as possible.
On Jan 14, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Liana Baciu <lb@oerp.ca> wrote:Hi Cocopapa,Based on the results in the survey publication only about 12% of people believe that OCA is too close to Odoo SA. The question was posed in the negative, which is why you may have interpreted it differently.The answers in the graphs suggest that people do know: how to use Github, how to find modules or how to test modules.A few of the long answer questions do confirm your hypothesis. 6/22 for the initial long answer section and 1/7 in the “comments” responses support your concerns. If this trend is true of all the data — which is unlikely, as I believe the responses chosen for publication were put there to show a variety of opinions as opposed to a random sample — then we’re talking about 14% are confused over how to get started/what to do and 11% are concerned with how close the OCA is with Odoo SA and protecting the interests of contributors. But because these responses are chosen on purpose, I presume that even fewer people fall into those two groups.Someone correct me if I am wrong. My suggestion for future surveys is not to use a display of data containing double negatives (“I don’t know…” + “fully disagree” = I do know).
Liana Baciu
416.272.3218
lb@oerp.caOERP Canada
647.478.6811
www.oerp.caIMPORTANT NOTICE: This email is intended only for the use of the Person(s) to whom it was addressed. It may contain information which is privileged & confidential. Any dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this message, or any of its contents or attachments by any person other than the intended recipient may constitute a breach of civil or criminal law and is strictly prohibited. If you are NOT the intended recipient please contact the sender and dispose of this email as soon as possible.
On Jan 14, 2016, at 7:23 AM, Cocopapa <cocopapa@gmail.com> wrote:Thanks for the results.
They show that OCA should be more actually an own body no more so much depending on ODOO Main Company and their roadmap.
It would be in deed very interesting to hear more about the OCA Roadmap.
Do you have at all one? If not why not?
Many developers who answered seem to be afraid of contributing. Either because of that their work gets used afterwards in commercial projects by ODOO S.A. or also because they don't understand how to contribute at all!
Perhaps it would be a good idea if you publish a tutorial step by step guide on how to use all those tools like github travis etc and how to contribute.On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 3:08 AM, Maxime Chambreuil <maxime.chambreuil@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote:Dear Contributors,Please find below the results of the 2015 Contribution Survey:If you have any questions or want to share your analysis and things the OCA should do, please reply in this thread.Cheers,_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe_______________________________________________
Mailing-List: http://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
Unsubscribe: http://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe
Reference
-
Results of the 2015 Contribution Survey
byOpen Source Integrators, Maxime Chambreuil- 12/01/2016 20:59:16 - 0-
-
-
Re: Results of the 2015 Contribution Survey
byOpen Source Integrators, Maxime Chambreuil- 15/01/2016 15:16:37 - 0 -
Re: Results of the 2015 Contribution Survey
byOpen Architects Consulting, Houssine BAKKALI- 15/01/2016 11:30:46 - 0 -
-
Re: Results of the 2015 Contribution Survey
byOpen Source Integrators, Maxime Chambreuil- 14/01/2016 15:17:36 - 0 -
-
-
-
