Community mailing list archives

Re: "The way to iOdoo"

- 05/15/2015 08:09:59
 Compiere failed business model, lost community and now sold to Consona. One of several reasons given by co-founder Jorg Janke:

"Compiere certainly did not fail due to its technology.  It failed due to lack of sales and marketing expertise, execution and the wrong bet to “upgrade” open source minded partners and customers to a traditional, commercial model."


Anders Arod

Anders skrev den 2015-05-15 11:37:
<blockquote cite="" type="cite">
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.


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.


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]


Post to:

Post to:

Post to: