Re: [Phpgroupware-developers] Re: Standard source code header and php Documentor

[David Kelly]

I totally agree with what Dan has written here.  I think that the phpgw 
community has got off on the wrong foot with these guys through a number of 
misunderstandings.  This sort of miscommunication happens all the time in 
written communication due to the lack of the non-verbal aspects of 
communication (and with english not been a first language it can make it even 
harder).  

Personally, I see Probiz and other commercial companies as been incredibly 
important to phpgw and embracing these companies will cause phpgw to develop 
into something much bigger and better than what can be achieved without.  The 
more full-time paid developers etc that we have working on phpgw the better - 
and if these developers are self-employed individuals, volunteers, or 
developers working for a commerical organisation then who really cares.  With 
the one proviso, that all copyrights are assigned to FSF and all CVS commits 
are stuff the community wants.  Probiz seem to be happy with both of these 
points and so I can't see what the problem is - in fact I can't see why we 
are not cheering them on! :)

Regards
-- 
David Kelly
Zeald Ltd

E-Centre - Massey University
PO Box 102-904
North Shore Mail Centre
Auckland
New Zealand
http://www.zeald.com



On Tue, 01 Jul 2003 07:01, Dan Kuykendall wrote:
> Christian Böttger wrote:
> > G'day!
> >
> >>They don't want communicate with the community.
> >
> > That's plain wrong, otherwise noone would write anything here from our
> > company.
>
> I have seen emails on this list from the probiz people, so I dont know
> why you would say they are not communicating with us.
>
> >>They have a business plan for what they receive money.
> >
> > What's wrong about it?
>
> I second that. Whats wrong about making money with Free Software.
> Stallman repeats over an over "Free as in Freedom, not as in beer".
>
> >>that what they do it's not a community project. They want
> >>that the "OSS developers" agree with their "commercial" product.
> >
> > Not correct. That is your interpretation, not our intention. Our
> > intention is to give as much work back into the phpGW project as
> > possible. It's of course up to the phpGW project whether they accept the
> > work or not.
>
> No problem here.
>
> >>We ask them, to spend some money for development to the
> >>developers, but they don't want. When I want i found a way.
> >
> > Oh well. AFAIK someone (I don't know whether is was you, honestly) asked
> > just to pass on most of the money. This is not possible. But, e.g. we had
> > open job positions. People could have applied. And: in the case parts of
> > our work go into the phpGW community: then "money" in form of work has
> > found it's way into the project; which it wouldn't otherwise. But you may
> > accept or not that we simply can't just take orders.
>
> Money is not going to normally be "donated" in such a fashion as writing
> a check to us (thru the FSF). Its almost always done by way of having
> paid employees write code and assign the copyrights to us (thru the FSF).
>
> >>Greetings to probiz. Follow OSS rules and not YOUR COMMERCIAL
> >>INTEREST
>
> I dont know what "rules" they have broken.
>
> > Please ask Richard Stallmann or anyone else from FSF or FSF Europe about
> > OSS and business. From all their statements, that's not a contradiction
> > at all. Commercial companies *must* follow commercial interests,
> > otherwise they will cease to exist. OSS (the FSF prefers "Free Software")
> > is about the accessability of source code and the freedom of the *user*
> > of the software to do what they want with the source. It' not about not
> > making money, and it's not anti-business.
>
> Correct, and in fact for-profit corporations can actually be held
> accountable by law for NOT trying to be profitable for the shareholders.
>
> > But well, if this opionion uttered by Reiner is the opinion of the
> > majority of the contributors and the core team, and all agree that they
> > don't want any code or contribution from our company at all and will not
> > have a look at further (code or other) contributions, well then just say
> > it and we will be off. Mind you that the GPL would not stop anyone from
> > forking of a new project under a different name.
>
> Its certainly not an opinion shared by me.
>
> > We are well prepared and much in favour of assigning any phpGW related
> > code from us to the FSF or FSF Europe, whichever may be the correct
> > address. That my count as "following OSS rules".
>
> This follows the rules as I see it.
> The only "rules" we should hold are to not have our CVS updated with
> stuff the community doesnt want, and to have copyrights assigned for
> anything put in CVS.
>
> Dan
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Phpgroupware-developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/phpgroupware-developers