1 Reply by kiang

(31 replies, posted in Wish List)

When using some open source softwares in the company, we usually try to change some parts of them. Like bootstrap(index file), the way processing password or connection and maybe include some private work-flows and put 'Winnie The Pooh' in the front-end. Then we could get survival from the attacks if they don't know the modifications we made and the people won't know we had done some stupid things besides the users in the company.

I was not talking about the traditional way that proprietary software vendors did. Most of web based open source softwares are using GPL license and they had gotten big successes like joomla, as bruzergear mentioned, and drupal, xoops, sugarcrm,...

If I said AGPL is a kind of communism in web based software, maybe GPL is something like tax in capitalism. There always exists people who try to argue some other people doing evasions of tax, but it's not the reason we should choose communism.

AGPLv3 for web based softwares is not the same case with GPLv3 for desktop softwares. For example, if somebody had a software being setup in his laptop. You borrow the laptop and use the software. In GPL, you can't ask the source code of it if somebody haven't released the software to you. But in AGPL, you could ask the source code since you could access it.

And in Micro$oft case, they sure won't release the source code in your view point. But the developers and vendors around the software licensed in GPL they are using, they have the rights to get the source code of it if they don't want to co-operate with Micro$oft, and they also have the rights to release the code to community. That's why Micro$oft won't use any softwares which licensed in GPL in their business.

Go to forum: Wish List

2 Reply by kiang

(31 replies, posted in Wish List)

When using AGPLv3, the software will only be used by IT professionals or the users who don't know the detail of the license. It just like communism in web based software, fewer and fewer people would invest resources on it.

GPL asks people to give source code to the ones who legally got a copy of software. AGPL enlarges the scope to accessors. Which part of the accessors would like to study from the source code? In positive, yes, some community could get benefits from it. But in negative, how about the hackers, competitors, and malicious people?

Accounting software always stores critical information of the company. If you think FA should be a great study case in academia, maybe AGPL is a good choice.

Group-office released their community version in AGPL. I guess the reason is they are doing business in ASP/SAAS model. It's not in the same background.

Go to forum: Wish List

3 Topic by kiang

(0 replies, posted in Translations)

Based on the one downloaded from project page, I'm translating FA 2.1B in Traditional Chinese. You could download it here:

http://code.google.com/p/twpug/source/browse/#svn/trunk/frontaccounting/2.1B/lang/zh_TW/LC_MESSAGES

Go to forum: Translations

4 Reply by kiang

(31 replies, posted in Wish List)

I personally don't like AGPLv3 just because anyone could ask the source event if I'm not willing to release. I'm not doing business like SAAS or ASP.

AGPLv3 asks everybody to make the modifications in public(If the results are accessible in public). GPLv3 leaves a reserved area to developers who could choose to release the source or not and the source could be released to customers only. GPLv3 would encourage more businesses to get involved and since nobody could do everything without getting help from others, the modifications may get released in public one day if people really need it.

Go to forum: Wish List

5 Reply by kiang

(31 replies, posted in Wish List)

According to the FAQ in gnu.org: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhatIsCompatible

In my understanding, the word 'compatible' means the programs which released under either GPLv3 or AGPLv3 could put together. It doesn't mean anyone could change the licenses of either program between GPLv3 and AGPLv3.

I've sent the message to legal@lists.gpl-violations.org. Just wait for further explanation.

Go to forum: Wish List

6 Reply by kiang

(31 replies, posted in Wish List)

How's the status in changing the license? Please read the comments in the news:
https://frontaccounting.com/wbt/pages/posts/new-license-type-gnu-agpl-from-release-2.166.php

Therefore, as OpenAccounting and WebERP use the GPL v2, not v3, it is not possible to change FrontAccounting to AGPL v1 or 2, if any code is left from those projects.

When using AGPL, anyone who could access the application could ask a copy of the source code. When making a special pricing logic for your customer with AGPL version and some vendors could access it, the vendors could ask the source code of the logic and sell it to another competitor.

Hosting the application without contributing back the modifications to the community is evil. But giving the rights to ask source code for the people other than customers is not a good idea, too.

Go to forum: Wish List

7 Reply by kiang

(2 replies, posted in Translations)

It would be better to put it in the program file...I was started with the empty.po in lang/new_language_template/LC_MESSAGES ...^^||

I'm using Ubuntu 8.04. The messages were brought from standard command in linux.

Go to forum: Translations

8 Topic by kiang

(2 replies, posted in Translations)

I found the language template is not up to date. And there seems some problems in source:

find . -type f -iname "*.php" | xgettext -o test.po -j -L PHP -f -
find . -type f -iname "*.inc" | xgettext -o test.po -j -L PHP -f -

./sales/customer_delivery.php:119: internationalized messages should not contain the ‘\r’ escape sequence
./sales/customer_invoice.php:118: internationalized messages should not contain the ‘\r’ escape sequence
./sales/inquiry/sales_deliveries_view.php:68: internationalized messages should not contain the ‘\r’ escape sequence

Go to forum: Translations