On 19/11/11 22:04 -0300, Luis Falcon wrote: > Thymbra donated to support the cause, but not because of the > "pay-it-or-beat-it" concept.
So you make contributions without reading the clauses. It is clearly a fund request to develop a module. > Tomorrow someone will say in order to get the upgrade or migration > script, you will have to pay.... I've seen this before.... vendor > lock-in. This is complete FUD. And this question is already fixed by the development policy we got since day 1. But you don't seem to trust us (by us, I mean all the developers of Tryton). > GNU Solidario migrated GNU Health from OpenERP to Tryton because it > was a democratic, community-based project. So, today, we'll be using > the Tryton infrastructure as a starting point. It is my wish to keep > it the way it is, but if things go in the wrong direction, GPL > provides the tools to ensure the community a truly free framework, so > no more migrations :-) Yes and it is your only warranty. > >> >> I don't agree with the concept, so I would not put it on the Tryton > >> >> homepage. > >> > > >> > I think we all know now that you don't want to be paid for development, > >> > but it is not the case for every others. > >> > But just think about that: without B2CK being paid by different parties > >> > and customers for almost all the current Tryton's modules, the Tryton > >> > project would be just a dream. > >> > > >> > More over, I don't see the difference between this and the service page > >> > [1] on which you asked to be referenced. > >> Completely different story. Thymbra offers services around Tryton, as > >> B2CK offers services about GNU Health, as both companies agreed and > >> signed ( B2CK is at the GNU Health services site > >> http://health.gnu.org/services.html ) > >> Thymbra will never put an add asking for money to develop something. > >> So, in the same way that I will never put an add like that in GNU > >> Solidario site, I don't think that should be in the Tryton homepage. > >> I would appreciate not to make public private documents between > >> Thymbra and B2CK, less in a public mailing list. It is not > >> professional. Send me an private email if you want to discuss about > >> it. > > > > I never talked about any private document. > > I think you are completly mixing B2CK and Tryton. > > Please read the second sentence of [1]. As your company is listed, it is > > public that you asked to be there. But if you don't want that's fine, > > we will remove it. > I think that the only one who is mixing - badly - Tryton and B2CK is you. No, I was always very clear. I think you don't understand that the "Tryton funding" box is not dedicated to B2CK. It will show any proposal of any body. > Thymbra deserves to be named on Tryton official website by its own > merit, the same as the other providers are. Yes, and again you misunderstand my point. You don't want to have ads on tryton website, so I just say there is already ads. So if you want to be right according to your thougths, you should ask to remove this page also. > >> I think that the Tryton foundation has to be independent from B2CK and > >> the other service providers, and so it should the Tryton website. > > > > I find that promoting individuals or organisation that provides services > > arround Tryton, will match the goals of the fundation which will be > > promote, protect and develop. > That's exactly what I say. But that is __not__ placing ads that say > "pay for this functionality" in the official Tryton homepage. One thing is clear, if we don't have this kind of functionnality, in 5 years we will still have no production module. We have already wait for 3 years and there was no progress. The only thing I see is that we start this "funding" mechanism 2 months ago and we will have the module 3 months later. Second, it is not "pay for this functionality", it is "if you want this functionnality for this date, you can fund it". And of course, if someday someone tries to block a development because it is in conflict his own interest then he will lost credibility. But the only valid way to prevent this is to have more developpers making good contributions to be part of the leads, because the lead of the development of Tryton owns to the ones who merit it. > > > >> If > >> we look for the promotion and protection of Tryton, we should not put > >> these type of ads, asking for money to develop something. It goes > >> against development of the system. > > > > Why ? > > > >> Tryton main portal can not become a > >> supermarket. > > > > What is the problem? > > > >> We can (and should) place the names of companies that will provide > >> service around Tryton. > > > > This is in complet contradiction with what you just say above. > > Please explain me what is the difference between promoting companies > > that provide service around Tryton and promiting companies that provide > > development service around Tryton? > You misread it. Promotion of companies that contribute to Tryton in > the official homepage is great. I would never make it an auction house > though... is not good for the society. You always say: "it is not good" but never explain why? If you want to convince, you must put arguments on the table. Because for me, promotion is promotion, I don't see any differences between promoting companies that contribute and promoting companies that contribute by proposing development. And even, you are just looking at one side of the elveos website because it can be turn the other way where people asks for features. It is a free market, open to everybody (and moreover writen with FOSS). -- Cédric Krier B2CK SPRL Rue de Rotterdam, 4 4000 Liège Belgium Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Email/Jabber: [email protected] Website: http://www.b2ck.com/
pgpIgHh3QRD2t.pgp
Description: PGP signature
