On 3/2/07, Jota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, what will be better for the future of TinyERP ?? 1) to acept the module, and at the same time all the people that implement and work with TinyERP will benefit from a larger marketplace, or 2) to refuse the module, and let TinyERP stay at a market niche level.
if that module can't be taken back by tiny sprl and the rest of the partners, it would be better to reject it, without any doubt. coding is not magic, and there's no module that can't be rewritten pretty much the same by another partner.
In conclusion, the way I see it, and please, don't flame me, it's just my opinion, is that open-source, more and more, means LAZY code, bad code... (because when someone writes _very good_ code, he usually wants to be paid for that... one way or another... right?)
no, you're wrong. who says free software programmers don't get paid? linux kernel developers get paid, openoffice developers get paid (by sun), gcc developers get paid, gnome developers get paid, firefox developers get paid, and obviously tiny erp developers (tiny sprl and partners) get paid. the volunteer thing is just a myth, and you can't build a point on a myth. http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6523449045.html
And, I agree, "freedom is a matter of choice", so why not give that freedom to the developers... why not let them do the code they want, and later, decide if they want to give something back, or not, to the makers of the other 99% of the code??
because it hasn't worked in the past, for other projects. if you give everyone the chance not to contribute, they just won't. software companies don't contribute their code to the linux kernel under the gpl because they want, it's because they're forced to do so if they want to use it.
Or am I totally wrong?
yes you are. -- Santiago Roza [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Tinyerp-users mailing list http://tiny.be/mailman/listinfo/tinyerp-users
