Community mailing list archives

Re: "The way to iOdoo"

- 05/15/2015 05:37:30
Openbravo is other close example. The forum is basically dead now. 
Openbravo changed to a partner strategy and restricted functionality
between enterprise and community version.  Almost Open Source its a
different concept. To kill the community might have been a collateral
damage and a price to pay....


Anders Arod

Dave Ellison skrev den 2015-05-15 09:57:
> Agree with this,
> Well (CalemEAM), here's one that had enterprise / community versions.
> Check out the forums, dead. Going to the Sourceforge last update 2013,
> around the same time people started leaving, because of the lack of
> community and support.
> We started using this as a light version of an asset management system
> we already had in place. The community then died and the company still
> call themselves "open source", because they have an old broken version.
> Dave
> On 15/05/15 07:57, Anders Wallenquist wrote:
> <blockquote cite="" type="cite">
> Den 2015-05-14 21:47, Alberto Barrionuevo skrev:
> > Historical contextualization: The LGPL is the most permissive license
> > created by the FSF to allow to be mixed with closed code, when the AGPL
> > is exactly the contrary, the less permissive one (so the one that better
> > warranties the freedom of the code). The FSF does not recommend to use
> > LGPL for generic code. It was intended mainly for libraries that need to
> > be included into any kind of code, open and closed one. For generic code
> > the FSF recommends GPL if it is not going to be served as cloud, and
> > AGPL (Affero GPL) if it is going to be served as cloud.
> >
> > On this point you can understand why OCA is not interested in to release
> > its modules as LGPL and was maintain them as only-AGPL. If they would
> > move to the permissive LGPL the said big corporation (including
> > Odoo,S.A.) may be able to develop and close their "Google Odoo" or
> > "Microsoft Odoo" or "iOdoo" including in its features-for-free not only
> > the Odoo S.A. code, but also all the 5.000 OCA modules.
> >
> > So with such a move any big player would be able to create a kind of
> > closed-source monster cloud Odoo service with more functionality (the
> > extension) than the current open Odoo.
> Exactly Odoo Enterprise will be a Google Docs wit absolutely no interest 
> for end users that want to extend and contribute to Odoo. Odoo community 
> will be weakened with out any "high end" modules (as Odoo SA thinks and 
> will be marketing). Odoo SA are digging a large hole and will be buried 
> in the swamp of licensed funded world with no return in sight.
> A fork at this time will create a Odoo Enterprise with the 260 original 
> modules + some new closed source modules and a fork with 5000 modules as 
> they are presented today. Odoo Enterprise cannot use any of the 5000 
> community built modules if they not relicence to LGPL or MIT. There is 
> absolutely no incitement for the common contributor to do that. Should 
> an end user that has done serious contributions to Odoo delibery move to 
> a crippled locked in version of the same system that they are using to day.
> As Odoo SA has weakened the ecosystem with their strange partner program 
> and not so transparent development, the fork has to build a new 
> leadership from ground up and start with new strategies for the product.
> I personaly don't understand how Odoo SA has the courage to make this 
> move out of the free software world without serious trying to preserve 
> the product and the ecosystem. With 5 % left (260 modules) there is not 
> many end user that can make the transition to Odoo Enterprise. If they 
> loose a large chunk of the community (it may not happen overnight but in 
> a year or two) and with them a lot of their old market and functionality 
> will varnish, competence  drains when their former integrators moves on 
> and follows their customers. In the licence funded world this happens 
> somtimes when the product owner want's a bigger share from thier 
> community and tries to take over end users from integrators. For 
> instance we have Jeeves doing this move in Sweden - Right know they have 
> only secured 25 % of their 2000 installations  (after one year) and they 
> have frightened their resellers in all other countries that they will do 
> this move there too which has led to a lot of lost affairs for the 
> mother company. Stupid move but initiated by decreased income from 
> licences (integrators build new modules of thier own instead of sell 
> Jeeves modules, we have some Jeeves installations where we adds 
> Odoo-functionality instead of buying Jeeves modules). But if they not 
> recognise the additions their integrator does for the whole ecosystem 
> this type of mistake is easy to do.
> Regards,
> Anders Wallenquist
> >
> > As I understand Odoo,S.A. is not afraid of such a movement because it
> > have done already such an extension of rich features with its upcoming
> > closed apps in Odoo v9. So Odoo,S.A. has an advantage of 1 or 2 years on
> > the competitive development race. But anyway I perceive the movement
> > quite risky for Odoo,S.A. itself because there may be very much better
> > funded corporations that may win such a development race on the
> > medium/long term.
> >
> > Another interpretation may be that any/some important shareholder(s) or
> > bondholder(s) of Odoo,S.A. is/are interested in to open the door to
> > closed Odoo's removing the current AGPL protection to its code not for
> > the final interest of Odoo,S.A. but others one (a kind of EEE strategy [1]).
> >
> > What I've described is not anything that never happened in the FLOSS
> > history. It is exactly what Apple did doing with MacOS X, that is an
> > extension of the permissively licensed Darwing (a BSD variant actually).
> >
> > Also it is similar to what Apple did for many years forking the LGPL'ed
> > KHTML to core their Safari. Luckily, in this case, after many years of
> > community requests, finally it was renamed and released under the open
> > WebKit community and used by Safari (closed), Chromium (open), Chrome
> > (closed), KDE Rekonq (open), Opera (closed) and many others.
> >
> > Regarding the possible EEE strategy of the shareholder(s) is more or
> > less what Oracle actually did with many of the Sun Microsystem open
> > source projects (OpenOffice, MySQL, OpenSolaris, etc.), forcing at the
> > end to the community to fork all them and to create foundations as OCA
> > to manage each one.
> >
> > [Disclaimer: End of simplifications]
> >
> > Best,
> > //Alberto.
> > [1],_extend_and_extinguish
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing-List:
> > Post to:
> > Unsubscribe:
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing-List:
> Post to:
> Unsubscribe:
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing-List:
> Post to:
> Unsubscribe: