Community mailing list archives
Re: Indiegogo: Upgrade Odoo Community Edition!by
On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 4:22 PM, James Fox <email@example.com> wrote:
Odoo SA will release the next version of Odoo, version 9, under LGPLv3.
Well James, as long as it is only the core and they have all the copyrights with ODOO SA and never ever anybody else than ODOO SA contributed to that code than that license change is legally OK. You might know better who contributed to that core than me.
Already years ago when they changed to AGPL we lost highly qualified people which is now TRYTON. Already at that time it was more or less exactly about the same subject and the major question who actually contributed to the core - or like it is called here "kernel".
If only one of them has not been asked and disagrees in moving the license to LGPL or any other License than this is simply illegal to move it - and also the fact that it has been done doesn't change this point! If LGPL is not possible because someone - and even only one single person - disagrees, than the kernel is legally actually still to be licensed under AGPL v.3.
Changing Licenses is really not easy in GPL and this is actually also the major point of customers who question all those moves to new licenses with new versions meanwhile. And they do good questioning that as they probably are using software which has not the license it should have. This can cause legal issues probably which might be even quite expensive - depending in what country you are or where they try to sue you.
IMHO to not make the mistake done years ago when TRYTON people moved out, I would keep all modules in AGPL v.3 as this is the most secure way also to ensure that ODOO SA has to base their work again on AGPL when they are using their code in EE Edition. If you are using LGPL this is not the case!!! So be very careful in using LGPL and read before why the Free Software Foundation does NOT recommend using the LGPL but actually recommends to use the AGPL.
ODOO had to change to AGPL because they wanted to build up the cloud service - this was IMHO the sole background - and they wanted to avoid that people don't share their code like they have to share their code. Service Providers are not covered in GPL!!!
Now with the AGPL they need it to bring their code they have developed since years into a proprietary closed source surrounding!
If we amass a collection of powerful GPL-covered libraries that have no parallel available to proprietary software, they will provide a range of useful modules to serve as building blocks in new free programs. This will be a significant advantage for further free software development, and some projects will decide to make software free in order to use these libraries. University projects can easily be influenced; nowadays, as companies begin to consider making software free, even some commercial projects can be influenced in this way.
An important fact and Kuali is a good example that this concept is actually working! Kuali is still AGPL!
Proprietary software developers, seeking to deny the free competition an important advantage, will try to convince authors not to contribute libraries to the GPL-covered collection. For example, they may appeal to the ego, promising “more users for this library” if we let them use the code in proprietary software products. Popularity is tempting, and it is easy for a library developer to rationalize the idea that boosting the popularity of that one library is what the community needs above all.
Exactly this is the fear that ODOO will no more contribute like it has done before to the Community.
But we should not listen to these temptations, because we can achieve much more if we stand together. We free software developers should support one another. By releasing libraries that are limited to free software only, we can help each other's free software packages outdo the proprietary alternatives. The whole free software movement will have more popularity, because free software as a whole will stack up better against the competition.