On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Cédric Krier <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. > It was a matter of trust. We trust(ed) Tryton.
>> 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). > It is not FUD, is protecting free software and the community that trust us. >> 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. Why did you fork OpenERP ? Did you do it for the sake of free software, or the society development, ethics, or just because technical reasons as you said in your faq ? > >> >> >> 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. By "Ads" I mean "Pay for functionality ads". Having a link to the companies that provide > >> >> 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. I don't agree. Tryton has come a long way without "pay-it-or-beat-it" ads. > > 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. Like OpenERP did. Sadly, lot of us put a lot of time and effort before that happened. > 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. Agree. That's why we need the Tryton Foundation. The way I see it is as follows : - Members will have an annual fee - This fee will pay the Tryton foundation employees. High-quality developers, marketing, and administrative personnel - Donations will help to accomplish this goal. > >> > >> >> 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. I always put them. wc "because" :-) > > 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. The problem with elveos is that is does not have the donation concept. It's way more motivating to donate for a cause that to see an economic blocker, based in a fixed amount. Again, I believe that with the Tryton foundation we, the members, will be able to finance the personnel. > 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). People asking features is great ! We should always welcome that ! Is just a matter of setting, as a community, priorities.Once those priorties are set, we go ahead and make projects and deliverables. > > -- > 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/ > -- [email protected] mailing list
