Can you please clarify -- you said the license was the same, but you didn't say what that license actually was. What license is your code available under?
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 07:18 Eric Maeker <eric.mae...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > For now, our NPO is too poor to engage in consulting or to pay external > developments and we awfully miss time to manage all aspects of a widely > collaborative project. > Sounds like we are travelling to "contrib" or "non-free" package ? Or may > be "non-debian" ? > > Belle journée > Cordialement > > > <http://maeker.fr> *Dr Maeker Éric* > > *Gériatre, psychogériatre* > eric.mae...@gmail.com > Twitter @DrMaeker <https://www.twitter.com/drmaeker> > RPPS 10002307964 > > maeker.fr Site personnel > empathies.fr Association Emp@thies > freemedforms.com Logiciel médical > > La gériatrie, c'est la médecine pour les pères et les mères Noël > > > Le ven. 10 janv. 2020 à 03:03, Paul Wise <p...@debian.org> a écrit : > >> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 8:00 PM Eric Maeker wrote: >> >> > Free Source code is provided to any demander approved by the NPO, code >> licence is still the same. >> >> I don't like this, people seeking source code should not have to get >> approval first. That said, I note that the source code is available >> directly from the site without approval. >> >> > But, the code documentation is only reserved to approved developers by >> this NPO. >> >> I definitely don't like this, it would be much better to publish the >> code documentation to everyone under a free license. >> >> > We do encourage new dev to apply to our NPO and to sign a CLA (which is >> still a draft piece of text actually). >> >> I don't like this either, it would be much better for devs to release >> their contributions under the same license that you do, then you can >> incorporate their changes, preserving their copyright over their >> changes and passing on their license to you to downstream users. So >> the whole of the software is then owned by a variety of copyright >> holders, each of whom also have to abide by the license given to them >> by the other contributors. The license on the software then cannot be >> changed without contributor consensus, so it becomes a much more solid >> project from a user perspective. Single-owner projects are much more >> easy to turn proprietary. >> >> http://ebb.org/bkuhn/blog/2014/06/09/do-not-need-cla.html >> >> > The problem is that FreeMedForms EHR needs access to private data >> >> Could you explain why this data needs to be private? It would be much >> better to release it publicly under a free license. >> >> > The private data are only available to paying partners to the NPO. >> >> Is this the only form of income that the NPO has available to it? It >> sounds like the NPO is seeking what is called an "Open Core" business >> model, where the core part of the project is public and freely >> licensed but addons are proprietary. The incentives here can be quite >> perverse, often companies seek to prevent outside contributions to the >> core or even remove features from the core so that more people start >> paying them for the proprietary addons. So I encourage you to consider >> alternative income streams. >> >> I think the best option for the would be to consult with as many of >> the practices, clinics, hospitals and emergency departments that you >> know about that use the software and find out the best way for the NPO >> to have enough resources to continue development consistent with the >> interests of the community of folks who use the software. Examples of >> potential income models could include: large grants/sponsorships that >> cover development and other costs, a membership subscriber base that >> pays for all maintenance and development costs, or more of a >> crowd-funding model where folks interested in specific features pay >> for their development, or a community of consultants that do all work >> on the project as requested by their customers or possibly a >> combination of these and other options. >> >> > Forks trie to access our private data using the open sourced server >> protocol (query to a php script). >> >> I would suggest to just make the data public and under a free license, >> but if you don't want to do that, the way to go would be to setup an >> e-commerce site where people have to pay before they can download the >> private data and then have in the software a way to load the locally >> saved data that has been downloaded from the site. I believe there are >> some freely licensed e-commerce tools in Debian and the consultants >> that offer support for Debian in your area might be able to help with >> finding, installing and configuring them. >> >> https://www.debian.org/consultants/ >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-consultants/ >> >> -- >> bye, >> pabs >> >> https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise >> >
