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 > > +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 any way, I don't see any SaaS problem except if you want to be the > > > > > only one to provide this service. > > > > > > > > The SaaS problem is for me to be able to distribute services based on > > > > Tryton without (re)distributing possible developments to the customer > > > > resp. the community, thus circumventing GPL3. > > > > > > > > > > So if the customer wants to have the source, he just needs to not use this > > > kind of service. > > > > So you agree with the possible misuse of Tryton code, contrary to the > > intention when putting it under GPL? I would prefer a solution to inhibit > > such > > a situation. > > IANAL, but reading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affero_General_Public_License > and http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html > gives me the impression, that AGPL3 was exactly made for this purpose: > > "We recommend that developers consider using the GNU AGPL for any software > which will commonly be run over a network." >
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. Second, I don't think AGPL is a good answer for a Business Software like Tryton. Because most of the time we need to adapt it for the company and we could have some cases where the company has specific needs and they will not share the code. So with an AGPL software, we are required to distribute the code to at least all employees of the company. This can prevent us to work with those companies. By the way, I don't know if interacting with the software through by example email will require to distribute the source code. Third, AGPL software needs to provide the source code through the network. That means we must develop some way to create an archive of the running code and so we must have the source code on the server not only pyc files. And what about data that are in xml file but have restricted access right? Finally, I find it is more works (constraints) than benefits. -- Cédric Krier B2CK SPRL Rue de Rotterdam, 4 4000 Liège Belgium Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Email: [email protected] Jabber: [email protected] Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpdnnRAaK3c4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
