Hello All m ybrothers
Fnally we found software for us we develope it ,we created it ,we investment out time in it ,
So
As we open source we must keep improve and develop this system to arrived to what we wish
my idea for now before v7 go outđ
why erpnext not be modules system and each one share him modules with community
and the management make channel received the ideas to added it to the core
Here is a list:
The problem with apps is that it ends up fragmenting the product and more and more âpartnersâ will start making closed extensions. That is a road we (as the core developer team) clearly donât want to go or encourage.
We as a service providing community should monetize training, setup, hosting, implementation, customization etc there is enough money going around to do that.
The code should always be open and contributed instead of constrained in private apps.
2 Likes
Wouldnât that depend much on whether such would be allowed by the license (gpl3)?
We had similar questions before and I canât get completely rid of the feeling such questions being answered based on what the responder thinks to be the case. And that might be different depending on who answers. I, for example, would think gpl3 license would not allow to add closed source apps to a frappe system.
100% clarity beyond any doubt in terms if whatâs legal and what not would be a great leap forward in terms of developing the ERPNext community in my eyes
The thing is that while ERPNext is licensed under GPLv3, Frappe framework is licensed under permissive MIT license, so you can legally build your proprietary application on top of it.
Please correct me if Iâm wrong.
true, I wasnât aware frappe being MIT licensed. So I guess thatâs what the creators wanted then (being able to build proprietary apps on top of frappe).
Isnât the comment from @rmehta above in this light a bit contradictory then? I mean having chosen MIT license (with the implications to legally enable proprietary Apps) for frappe while on the other hand not wanting âpartnersâ to actually do such.
disclaimer: my statement assume @strixaluco is right and MIT actually gives the freedom to make non-free apps on top of it.
Thatâs a bad assumption.
Most frameworks are MIT licensed or licensed liberally. In this case it was inspired from Rails.
not quite clear what you mean by that. Can you clarify?
Apart from the legal aspect ⌠still not 100% clear whether you (Frappe Technologies Pvt. Ltd., as the copyright owner) actually âŚ
- A) welcome proprietary Apps to be created based on frappe, or
- B) rather wouldnât want such to happen?
We donât care:
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED âAS ISâ, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY
CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT,
TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE
SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
I think @vrms was curious not about warranties, but about whether Frappe team wants proprietary derivatives to appear, given the fact that Frappe framework is licensed under MIT.
Assumption is that if authors donât want proprietary derivatives to be built from their code, then copyleft license (GPLv2, GPLv3, AGPL etc.) is a choice. If authors donât mind proprietary derivatives originating from their code, then permissive license (MIT, BSD, Apache etc.) is fine.
@strixaluco I think the license is pretty clear.
I donât want to get into an ideological debate, but in 2016 these distinctions donât matter as much. Like I said before, Odoo went AGPL but that did not stop them from going proprietary. Its the actions that matter more than license.
Framework is a developer tool, so the goal is to maximize its adoptions, so MIT. ERPNext is an end-user application, so GPL.
1 Like
Thatâs true indeed. Moreover, GPLv3 by itself canât stop somebody from copying code and releasing paid proprietary product.
On the other hand, itâs better when both actions and license reflect the same. Thatâs going to be more convincing, than actions only for those unfamiliar ones.
So community can be creative and improve and earn some mony 
without any
fears from future responsibilities