• From: USA
  • Registered: 11/21/2008
  • Posts: 44

Re: Change of license

Here is my opinion on it all for what it is worth.

We currently contribute money and ideas to many opensource projects.

We have been anxiously awaiting the release of FA 2.1 and to tell you the truth, the only thing we are hesitant about is the new license.

Many of the fastest growing open source projects we participate in are not using this new license you are thinking of going to and I think it is for good reason.

The new license will make people like me stay away from your project.   Mainly for the simple reason that it is different from what most of the rest of the open source community uses.
We don't have time or interest in working with Licenses that we don't understand fully or are not familiar with or which would require us to make changes to our business model that includes many other opensource softare applications.

I would suggest following the model of Joomla.  In my opinion they are really doing the opensource thing in the right way.
They literally have thousands of developers creating all kinds of modules and addons to their core system.  Some of these are commercial addons and some are non-commercial. Some release the code and some don't.  The key is that they have a very open and non-restrictive license that allows a lot of freedom to the developers and community to use and contribute to the software how they please.  This attracts a lot of people to their project and makes it more and more valuable to the developers.

Most of the contributions to the opensource software is made by programmers who are investing their time to develop new applications for their clients or are funded by people like me who provide SAAS to clients who have no interest in getting the source code, they just want  to make sure everything works.

Joomla use the traditional GPL v2 or higher.   They are living proof that if you use this license your project and community will grow tremendously.
If you use other licenses, then I believe your project will not be as popular with developers and SAAS providers in the future for a whole variety of reasons that don't always make logical sense other than it just seems restrictive even if it is not.

In my opinion, FrontAccounting needs to keep in mind that they are an open source accounting software system and that the people who are using this software will also be using website, cms, crm, and many other open source software applications out there to run their businesses. 

If you look at the best cms, crm, and other opensource business software out there, you will notice that very few of them use anything other than the GNU GPL type licenses and so I think you will get the most support for your project if you use the same licenses so as to not confuse or frustrate those that are trying to integrate your great accounting software with all the other great opensource and proprietary software they are using for their clients' or own businesses.

In summary, I would stay away from the AGPL license and if anyone says that the community won't give back or contribute under the traditional GPL licenses, then I think they are wrong and that the opposite is actually true.  Joomla is proof of that.  Follow their example and you may be surprised at how fast your project grows and the support you get from people like me that contribute to the success of projects like Joomla.

That's my 2 cents.
Thanks for the great software.  I look forward to the release of 2.1 under a license that will not scare away people like me who are anxious to contribute to your project.

Dave

27 Reply by kiang (edited by kiang 02/06/2009 01:08:12 am)

  • kiang
  • New member
  • Offline
  • Registered: 04/27/2008
  • Posts: 8

Re: Change of license

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.

  • From: UK
  • Registered: 05/13/2008
  • Posts: 31

Re: Change of license

I do not agree.

A lot of new projects are turning towards AGPL, because there has been a lot of issues in web projects that was provided under the GPL license.

AGPL simply give the same rights to people that provide open source web applications, as GPL gives to providers of client based software. On the client side the GPL license has been very succesfull.

I am mostly concerned about the project itself. If we are going to base a business model on frontaccounting, we need to make sure that it will still be here in 10 years.

What you guys want is not an open source project. FrontAccounting is not an opensource project if it is released under GPL v3.

Read more at:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9917947-16.html
http://forums.alfresco.com/en/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=11539

  • Registered: 09/23/2008
  • Posts: 4

Re: Change of license

On the whole, I believe the community is better served by the AGPL.

FA was developed and released under an open source license.  It would be contrary to the community spirit if SaaS effectively turned FA into closed source, proprietary software.

Another point is that regardless of the license (GPL vs AGPL), you should already be mindful of the software coupling between your proprietary code and any open source code that you use.  Done properly should warrant no concerns over your proprietary code becoming tainted by the GPL, and being forced to turn over your closed source.

See: http://library.findlaw.com/2004/May/11/133415.html for one lawyer's perspective on the IP risk.

The alternative is to develop an accounting system from scratch, or pay to license some existing software for your SaaS offering.

30 Reply by bruzergear (edited by bruzergear 02/07/2009 09:27:10 pm)

  • From: USA
  • Registered: 11/21/2008
  • Posts: 44

Re: Change of license

I am not disagreeing with the concept and legalities of the AGPL, I am just saying that if you go to the AGPL, you will get less people contributing to your project.

I again point to Joomla as an example.  If they used the AGPL license, then I think their project would not get even half the support and contribution of all the developers.
They would not have all those awesome extensions and addons out there that really make Joomla popular.

People would simple just take part in a different opensource community that is less restrictive on what they can and can't do with the code they develop.

I want to see Front Accounting succeed in the long term and that is why I am recommending you stay away from the AGPL, because I don't think you will attract the commercial developers you need in your community to help it grow and become more valuable to all who use it.

I think Front Accounting needs a lot of Developers making awesome modules for it.
There will be a lot more developers interested in making modules and contributing to the project if they can see that they can have the freedom to decide which parts of their code they want to give away for free and which parts they want to sell as a commercial module.
If you require all developers to give all their code all the time, then you will simply see a huge drop in development and get much less code contributed overall.
That is why Joomla is so successful and I can see FrontAccounting being very successful in the long term if they give  developers the same opportunities and freedoms that Joomla gives theirs.

In summary:
It seems that the real problem you are trying to solve is which license you should use to make sure that you get the community contributing as much code back to the project as possible.

I believe the AGPL will lead to less overall code contribution from the community. It will be harder to accomplish your goal of making FA the best opensource accounting software out there if you can't leverage all the talent, financial support, and code that would otherwise come to FrontAccounting if it was under a GPL license.

Dave

  • From: UK
  • Registered: 05/13/2008
  • Posts: 31

Re: Change of license

Thank you vipsoft smile

vipsoft wrote:

Another point is that regardless of the license (GPL vs AGPL), you should already be mindful of the software coupling between your proprietary code and any open source code that you use.  Done properly should warrant no concerns over your proprietary code becoming tainted by the GPL, and being forced to turn over your closed source.

See: http://library.findlaw.com/2004/May/11/133415.html for one lawyer's perspective on the IP risk.

FrontAccounting is somewhat modular... I suppose developpers of modules could still develop under different licenses as long as the core remains intact, just like in the case of GPL licensed client software? As I see it, this AGPL/GPL issue only involves the core developped by FrontAccounting. AGPL would still allow commercial developpers to contribute with modules, while the core would still be protected.

The question really boils down to wether we want an open source project or not? We will probably loose some contribitors that eventually could end up being big freeriders. However, in the long run, I think we will see the benefits of having an open source project.

  • Registered: 09/23/2008
  • Posts: 4

Re: Change of license

Joomla is distributed under the GPL. The Joomla developers have taken the position that extensions that use the Joomla API cannot be proprietary. Their interpretation follows that the GPL != LGPL.  This has turned away some developers but Joomla's user base continues to grow.