@rvalyi

I am glad that at least somebody are not saying only "Your not right"...


> THEY ARE THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS


If you would carefully read GPL you would notice that once you have published 
something under GPL, and even more once somebody have added something to your 
code under GPL too, you are let's say "primus inter pares", but not the owner 
of the code anymore. OK, it lets you writing that you are author, but it do not 
grants the right to copy under any other less free license.

Yes my dear OpenERP is a trade mark, and Tiny has some rights to use it, but it 
definitely do not compare to the other ERP. Please investigate what situation 
is with Unix like OS'es, and their trademarks - how much effectively the same 
OS are under different trademarks. Is that what Tiny wants?


> Now they might find smart ways to get their work paid without to ever have to 
> enter that sloppy double license game.


Be my guest! If you would read the GPL, you would find out, that any software 
that are unable to function without the host (which is under GPL), should be 
licensed under GPL, period.

I am aware that none of the software from Axelor or Tiny we are talking about 
are able to function and be usable without OpenERP. Or again - I am not right?


> Words are words, actions are what ultimately define what you are.


Here I agree with you - but that is not true with this site - here do not count 
what are one doing, but who paid the bill. So why should we post our modules to 
the launchpad, rather than placing them elsewhere? They would become berried in 
launchpad, and visibility would go to companies which bought partnership, but 
contributed back not a single line of code.

And that my darling does not infringe GPL in any way :) Do not scare me, as 
fear is distinctive only to the illiterates...

And if somebody are walking on a thin ice are those who make tricks with double 
licensing a code.


> I already had the occasion to tell it to Fabien and he told me that they have 
> a solution for India and China, which is already a start. Indeed, I totally 
> understand your Latvia customers will not pay you enough to afford a Tiny 
> partnership. That's definitely an urgent issue for Tiny. 


OK, there are not problem with Latvia, as we have only 1/2 difference of the 
rates compared to western Europe. But as I know most of the other countries in 
the world hardly could afford even that...

And think of people from, let it be, China...India where people could 
contribute back the same even though they are get paid less and.

It is funny that if you plan to service lot of local customers in those 
countries, you would probably find cheaper to pay extra developers than paying 
for partnership to western partner.

When someone from China will make a fork. There will be another cheapo product 
made in China. Will Tiny be able to do anything about it?
OK, they will call it a bit differently.


> So sraps, it's not about the partnership being too expensive.


You are completely right with this, but not so right with the remaining...
It is always too expensive to by something you do not need. We are working now 
on this soft for a year, and redeveloped some parts of it, as this approach 
were cheaper than paying Tiny for this job. 

I doubt that Tiny would perform so good unless the community, so do not spit on 
it. It is no good.


> Well I think you are getting a bit paranoiac here.



> And bare in mind that the situation just improved recently as Tiny just 
> offered a new quasi garbage repository where everyone can share a module even 
> if unsure about the scope and quality.


It is a bit interesting that after such a little pressure from community there 
were major improvements before and now, isn't it. So please do not push me in 
so aggressive manner. I am spending my time writing all this, just to let 
people know that not all the thing they are doing is so right, and in the sake 
of the project.

A) It is not right that people who post code and resolve bugs, should pay as 
much as those who do not contribute back, is it?

B)It is not right that one should pay for what he is not interested in, 
whatever is it a one euro or one thousand. It would be more convenient to pay 
for services you consume separately.

P.S. and please motivate all your "you're not right", otherwise it is some 
aggressive barking, but not normal discussion.

sraps




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=35104#35104

-------------------- m2f --------------------


_______________________________________________
Tinyerp-users mailing list
http://tiny.be/mailman/listinfo/tinyerp-users

Reply via email to