Cédric Krier schrieb:
> On 04/11/09 22:57 +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
>> Is this okay for b2ck: Some company offers paid Tryton-as-a-Service
>> while not publishing their own extensionsi
>
> We can do almost nothing against this. And by the way, you can do a lot with
> just module and module can
On 04/11/09 22:57 +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
>
> Is this okay for b2ck: Some company offers paid Tryton-as-a-Service
> while not publishing their own extensionsi
We can do almost nothing against this. And by the way, you can do a lot with
just module and module can be in the license the develop
Cédric Krier schrieb:
>> Let's imagine a SaaS-Provider implementing a complete adoption to German
>> requirements. This provider has put quite some effort into his extension
>> modules and offers services to small and medium companies. As programs
>> like Lexware or Sage show, many of these compan
On 04/11/09 22:11 +0100, Hartmut Goebel wrote:
> Cédric Krier schrieb:
>
> > First, I'm not affraid of people who will run a modified version of Tryton
> > as
> > service. Because they will have a lot of work to follow us with release as
> > they will need to patch each time. I think contributing
Cédric Krier schrieb:
> First, I'm not affraid of people who will run a modified version of Tryton as
> service. Because they will have a lot of work to follow us with release as
> they will need to patch each time. I think contributing is the cheapest way to
> maintain your code.
Let's imagine a
On 31/10/09 12:08 +0100, Mathias Behrle wrote:
> * Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:54:17
> +0100):
>
> > * Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Sat, 31 Oct 2009
> > 11:37:35
> >
* Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:54:17
+0100):
> * Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:37:35
> +0100):
>
> > On 31/10/09 11:15 +0100, Mathias Behrle wrote:
> > >
* Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:37:35
+0100):
> On 31/10/09 11:15 +0100, Mathias Behrle wrote:
> > * Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Fri, 30 Oct 2009
> > 14:53:41 +0100):
> > > And
On 31/10/09 11:15 +0100, Mathias Behrle wrote:
> * Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:53:41
> +0100):
> > And any way, I don't see any SaaS problem except if you want to be the only
> > one to provide this service.
>
* Betr.: " [tryton] Re: GPL3 <-> AGPL for Tryton?" (Fri, 30 Oct 2009 14:53:41
+0100):
> > just stumbled upon
> > http://fptiny.blogspot.com/2009/10/openerp-and-agpl.html .
> >
> > Are there any experiences, if AGPL could indeed fight the SaaS problem?
GPL v3 is a stripped down version of, for me, the better gpl: AGPL.
Imho it was forced by big companies that you can run a SaaS without
releasing the source with GPL v3. That chapter which is included in AGPL had
to be changed/removed.
And btw: the agpl is not compatible with gpl as stated by the
On 30/10/09 14:39 +0100, Mathias Behrle wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> just stumbled upon
> http://fptiny.blogspot.com/2009/10/openerp-and-agpl.html .
>
> Are there any experiences, if AGPL could indeed fight the SaaS problem?
>
No, because of the license of Open Object Web Client (OEPL [1]) because i
12 matches
Mail list logo
