Ned, As I read your license text, it explicitly forbids anyone who makes a code modification from releasing the source for that modification to anyone except your company, at the same time as it mandates that the code be returned to your company. Did I misread the license? If not, it seems like vendor lock-in (to your company) is by no means avoided. I hope I did misread it.
Matt On Fri, 2002-10-25 at 17:42, Ned Lilly wrote: > > Hello all, > > Thanks for the kind words. All very accurate points, below. OpenMFG is = > not free, and it's not "open source" according to the OSI definitions. = > It is, however, a very sophisticated MRP/ERP application - 400,000+ = > lines of Qt/C++ and business logic in the PostgreSQL procedural = > language. Our goal in writing our own license was to build something = > that would give our partner resellers and consultants not just the = > flexibility to work with the code around the edges, but the financial = > incentive to make significant contributions to ongoing development as = > well. And of course, since we're built on top of Linux/PostgreSQL/Qt, = > freedom from vendor lock-in (including us - all customers get source) is = > a big part of our story. > > We'd invite anyone with a manufacturing/ERP business focus to come check = > us out. And since our Standard product interfaces to a third-party = > accounting package, we'd love to work with the SL community if there are = > situations where a mix-and-match might be appropriate for particular = > customer needs. > > Thanks, > > Ned Lilly > OpenMFG, LLC > > > > With regards the "openmfg"=20 > > Please take note though, that it may be open source, it isn't free. = > The > > license is not GPL or one of its derivatives, but their own brew. That > > said, while they keep a tight reign on the software the license is not > > exactly overly harsh. And after reading their literature, and from my > > own experience the QT base upon which it stands is however, the best > > possible option they could have chosen for performance and > > cross-platform capability. If the rest of the application is as good = > as > > they say, it should quickly stand out from the crowd. > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:sql-ledger-users-bounce@;freelists.org] On Behalf Of Finance > > Sent: 24 October 2002 17:55 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [SL] Re: Fwd: What we would like to see...=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Holy smoke, just registered, but if this is half of what it promises = > to > > be I do not see any reason why people pay millions for SAP and the > > likes! Open source and interface with any other accounting package as > > well, sounds too good to be true. > > Just registered and surely going to look into this. Thanks! > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:sql-ledger-users-bounce@;freelists.org] On Behalf Of Roderick = > A. Anderson > > Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2002 4:14 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [SL] Re: Fwd: What we would like to see...=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > On Wed, 23 Oct 2002, Michael Stares wrote: > >=20 > > > Then someone who wants a manufacturing ERP would install: > > > 1) SL=20 > > > 2) the manufacturing app (basically enhanced inventory functionality > > > and a new works order table + functionality). > > > 3) my proposed MRP Server algorithm to perform PO and WO generation > > > for factories with complex products. > > >=20 > > > Anyone interested in establishing a project to develop the=20 > > > manufacturing app (as developers)? > >=20 > > http://www.openmfg.com/ > >=20 > >=20 -- Matt Benjamin The Linux Box 206 South Fifth Ave. Suite 150 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 tel. 734-761-4689 fax. 734-769-8938 cel. 734-216-5309
