Contributors mailing list archives

Browse archives


Re: Recommended Contributor Tooling (RCT)

Elico Corp, Eric Caudal
- 21/10/2015 14:05:27
Credit has been updated in github.
About the purpose of OCA repository, it is still to be discussed but it could cover in order of priority:
1.- easy onboarding based on OCB
2.- Production based on OCB (for me actually the same as 1)
3.- Easy customizable docker that allows to test some repo via oca_dependencies.txt ( or similar)
4.- Developer dockers (including postgres?)

In parallel thread about the topic, additional tools have been proposed such as travis2docker, voodoo and it might be interesting to include them in the project.
Eric Caudal [Founder and CEO]
Skype: elico.corp. Phone: + 86 186 2136 1670 (Cell), + 86 21 6211 8017/27/37 (Office)
Elico Shanghai (Shenzhen/Singapore) Odoo Gold Partner, best Odoo Partner 2014 for APAC
On 10/21/2015 07:23 PM, Florent Aide wrote:
<blockquote cite="" type="cite">
2015-10-21 3:38 GMT+02:00 Eric Caudal <>:
> Hi Florent,
> I feel I have to answer to your mail.
> First of all, as I already mentioned, sorry for forgetting your credit in
> our contribution.

forgetting is one thing, keeping that way is another.

> Said so, your work is open source and we just used it to create our own fork
> with clear improvements suitable for our needs and views.
> You can accuse us of not crediting you but surely not of ripping off. The

I do not accuse, I merely note the facts...

Taking without credit, removing original authors, reuploading under
another name to github and dockerhub and then proposing to work on an
OCA docker citing your work without acknowledging ours (until shamed
to do so). Once exposed minimize matters and cover-up even more by
removing the last trace of our name from the files without adding a
proper acknowledgment!!! (my remark from a few hours ago)

As of right now I still do not see our company name in your README...

Those are facts, not accusations. I accuse you of nothing, I merely state facts.

> work in our repo is aimed for our company and if we used your base to our
> work, we clearly modified and adapted it for our purpose (cleansing what we
> think are "unnecessary" help files is part of it). As said we just used
> opensource rules to built our specific docker files that we in turn
> published opensource.

I see no problem to people reusing my work do not try and give lessons please.
As I already pointed if the help file is something unnecessary at
least remove the code that use it... Because at the moment the boot
file is orphaned and will fail when someone tries the corresponding
command. You do not shed yourself in a good light when insisting on
this point.

> We do not intend to sell it or take any benefit from it: it is even more, I
> proposed a docker repo in OCA pushing all my existing knowledge and RD for
> free (3 months of hassle trying to make work your docker in China which we
> never succeeded) so that we could start sharing and building an open source
> repo for the benefits of the community.

So basically you took 3 months to make adaptations without even asking
for help or proposing changes and then proposed your work as novel
ideas for inclusion in OCA. fair enough, it is chinese customization.

> We could have proposed commits to your repo and we didnot (we felt that our
> objectives were different than yours and thought that your repo was valid
> for the European market). Maybe a mistake but I personally think that I'd
> rather improve the OCA proposal in a collaborative manner, touching more
> audience. I do not intend to push specifically our repo there, simply build
> a suitable docker repo for OCA.

Before speaking of building a docker file for OCA we should maybe
state the purpose and scope we try to achieve.

In your first announcement you spoke about production images. But then
in this thread you are also stating the image should help people
download and evaluate Odoo.
While those two goals may not contradict themselves they also may
conflict. If this "conflict" arise we should have guidelines as to
precisely what are our proposed goals.

What would be the proposed scope and target of an OCA docker image?
This is the first question we should try and answer here.
On my side I am interested to have a base image (same as xcgd/odoo)
based on OCA upon which I will build my production images. I don't
really intend to favor "demo build" since anybox recipe is
(originally) intended just for that a provides a better way to do it.

> Please note that if you decide to push your work to OCA, you will become
> coauthor and will have to accept that other companies work are included in
> yours, diluting your original work. This is how it works in the OCA: this is
> a team and comprehensive effort to build common tools.

I fully understand this and don't have problem with that, once again
no need to try and give lessons to me about open source. From my point
of view a "team" works together, it seems rather strange you give me
lessons when I am the one exposing your practices.

> I hope I cleared some misunderstanding and that from there we can start
> building collaboration for an solid OCA docker repository.

A clear notice of where the code comes from would be nice and prove
working together is something we can achieve. And as already stated I
began by being really balanced in my remarks. If I am taking time to
write here it _is_ because I want to achieve collaboration together
and share something with the community.

I am sure that once you just acknowledge our work in your README and
stop trying to cover up, we will all be able to work together in an
open fashion and good spirit.


  Florent AIDE
  Président directeur général
  59 rue Meslay, 75003 Paris
  Tél: +33 1 83 62 72 87
  Mob : +33 6 59 14 19 76

Post to: