Contributors mailing list archives


Re: Licence of version 9.0 modules

Camptocamp SA, Yannick Payot
- 14/09/2016 09:38:25

the commitment I was talking about is the one saying OCA will respect license choosen by the author of the module and not changing it unless approval from it's community.

I know we already have multiple type of licenses whereas the majority is AGPL. And I'm not against multiple license and AGPL is not mandatory but it is still advised.

So I was just reacting that there would be no way to do a mass commit to LGPL license, each module should be dealt case per case if we wanted changes and for what I see I think we want to stick to AGPL here and there.


Yannick Vaucher
Business Solutions Software Developer

Camptocamp SA
PSE A, CH-1015 Lausanne
Phone: +41 21 619 10 30
Office: +41 21 619 10 10

On 14 September 2016 at 11:23, Nhomar Hernandez <> wrote:

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:53 AM, Yannick Vaucher <> wrote:
We won't change AGPL to LGPL as it would be against OCA commitement.

This specific statement is not true, OCA commitment is protect customer, developer and community from a lot of things Licence AGPL and LGPL depending the case can help with that.

What's the point of have huge quantity of modules if they can not be used properly with enterprise version and/or what's the point to block the enterprise version to finance the product evolution? I mean we are all working hard, make religious statements without proper basements is not healthy.

I think like Pedro on this matter and everybody must be free to chose a proper FOSS licence and contribute without religion commitment to OCA.


Nhomar Hernandez
CEO Vauxoo.
Twitter: @nhomar
Odoo Gold Partner
Skype: nhomar00 (Envia mail previo no lo superviso siempre).
Móvil Venezuela:
+58 4144110269
Móvil México:
+52 1 4773933942

Post to: