Skip to Content
  2. Mailing Lists
  3. Contributors

Archives

Contributors

  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Raphaël, indeed both points are correct, but referring to the first one, let me point that sending the message from OCA board members that the "good" license to choose is LGPL will make people that are not informed/don't think on the consequences/don't care to go to that one, destroying great part of the current OCA ecosystem value. I would only do the exception on the website one that touches frontend templates, for being able to protect your customer in case of website custom theme.

    Ivan, please read my previous reasoning why base/tool modules shouldn't be LGPL, because if so, the modules of the second type will start to disappear.

    Regards.
    by Pedro M. Baeza - 03:31 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Hello a few comments:

    1) it should be noticed that some OCA users would prefer LGPL. While important modules authors generally prefer AGPL... Well it doesn't really matter if some users prefer free beers, what matters is mostly how modules author think the rules are fair for them to be able to invest time and money in all that. Otherwise, without modules author, there is no such an OCA ecosystem period.

    That been said I think some simple commodity framework modules are better under LGPL license to increase adoption instead of being simply copied in illegal ways. But of course this decision belongs to the authors themselves.

    2) about double licencing with money: money allocation would be a source of tension/fight if that money had to be allocated to each individual contributor of the module... So we could imagine it could go to the OCA instead. But let's not forget OCA funding produce probably less than 1% of the value of the OCA ecosystem. 99% or more is provided by people/company writting modules and maintaining code without receiving a cent from the OCA and it will likely remain so. So if such a paid double license were to happen, I think it should be an opti-in from module authors. Otherwise modules authors would simply get their AGPL protection highjacked.

    Debian buget is around 100k USD/year I think. It doesn't prevent Debian from being a very important and successful Linux distribution. So the OCA can be successful without pretending to fund more than 1% of its ecosystem value, it should focus on providing the infrastructure for the collaboration.

    On Mon, Sep 8, 2025, 9:52 AM sylvain.legal@grap.coop <notifications@odoo-community.org> wrote:

    Hi all ! 

    Hope you're well.

    I just had an idea regarding that recurring topic about licences. (It's a draft idea ! maybe it's not a great idea ! but well)

    What about to have all OCA modules under double licences ? 
    (See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensing)

    - A licence AGPL. Can be installed on all odoo instances, but if modules depends on it, there have to be AGPL too. (contamination concept).

    - another licence that allows extra non AGPL modules to depends on it, but it is paid, OCA receiving the money.

    Use case 1 : you are a full OpenSource player, you install all the modules under AGPL licence  and you develop also under AGPL licence, so you redistribute all the work. (no changes)

    Use Case 2 : You develop extra modules under privative licence that don't depend on OCA modules. you can install your private modules and the OCA AGPL modules on the same instance. (no changes)

    Use Case 3 : You develop extra modules under privative licence that depends on OCA modules. You give some money to the OCA, that can continue to maintain that great work, over the years ! (new possibility)

    Pro :

    - some recurring revenu for OCA, specially for "core" OCA modules. I mean, web_responsive, report_xlsx, etc... (for exemple) are modules installed in most of customer instances, because there are "must have".

    - People that are using OCA modules contributes with code (derivated module under AGPL, like Tecnativa / GRAP / others actors) or money otherwise.

    - People who develop modules under the OCA do not feel that others are benefiting from them without contributing in return.

    - We provide a legal solution for many "closed sources" actors. (for the time being, I'm pretty sure that some OCA AGPL modules are installed with licence infringement) on many instances, because there is no solution (except redevelop the whole module, of course).

    - I talked many times with integrators that says that their customer doesn't want to share under AGPL licence the modules they pay. For the time being, there are no incitation to do it. But if tomorrow, there is maybe, more modules will be shared under AGPL ressources, that is great for Open Source Ecosystem.

    Cons :

    - I haven't thought about it, but there surely are !

    Questions : 

    @Jean-Charles Drubay, (and @other people in the same case) : you mentioned some modules (web_timeline, report_xlsx, etc..) you want to see under LGPL license to be able, to depend on it, in custom private modules. (I guess) Do you think that your customers could be agree to pay some euros per monthes for such features ? (In return, these modules would certainly be better maintained and migrated more quickly.)


    Shall we meet up for a beer and a chat ?

    See you on Sunday and the next week for some of you.


    Le Lundi, Septembre 08, 2025 13:57 CEST, Ivan Sokolov via Cetmix OÜ <notifications@odoo-community.org> a écrit:
     

    Internal communication: Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? [...] ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

    Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:

    • Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? Because it helps to widespread them being used as core parts in various deployments, including close-sourced. Pros: it builds vendors dependency forcing those non-OCA vendors to contribute to the OCA (well, at least part of them).
    • Business flow modules should stay AGPL for the very reasons mentioned by Pedro and Enric.

    Bonus: we might consider selling a non-AGPL licenses to those, who would like to have some AGPL modules but cannot use them due to the license incompatibility. Pros: we can get money from that. Cons: there are a lot of them either, so this is something to be discussed separately. Anyway I would like to have this discussion opened.

     

    Best regards,

    photograph
    Ivan Sokolov
    Cetmix Odoo Solutions
    cetmix.com
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram 
    This message is sent using Mail Messages Easy app

     

    ----- Original message -----
    Date: Sep 8, 2025, 1:32:07 PM
    From: Notifications
    Subject: Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
     
    Hello everyone,
     
    You’re right that Odoo’s relicensing from AGPL to LGPL contributed to their ecosystem’s growth, but I think it’s important to recognize the context. The growth was not solely because of LGPL being “friendlier,” but also because Odoo SA introduced a dual licensing model: they offered parts of the code under a proprietary license and could directly capture revenue from that. This created a business incentive that supported their expansion.

    In the OCA’s case, the situation is different:
    • If we moved from AGPL to LGPL, there would be no equivalent proprietary licensing model.
    • The benefits would mostly go to implementors who could build proprietary modules on top of LGPL community work.
    • The OCA itself would not receive revenue, nor would it strengthen the community commons — it would only dilute protections for contributors.
    Also, the OCA can have legal issue because there are contributors that didn't sign the SLA, as happened with vertical-medical 8 years ago (https://github.com/OCA/vertical-medical/issues/183)
     
    That’s why, for us, the decision isn’t only about adoption, but about ensuring contributors’ rights and the long-term sustainability of shared resources.

    I agree with you that clearer legal guidance and better communication to customers are necessary, and we should keep pushing for that. But from my perspective, simply shifting to LGPL without a mechanism to capture value (like Odoo SA did) risks weakening the community without strengthening OCA in return. For that reason, I would prefer to leave the decision of the license on each individual when adding a new module.

    Best regards,
     
    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 13:11, Pedro M. Baeza (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
     
     
    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    Powered by Messages Easy Pro

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



     

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    by Raphaël Akretion - 03:21 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Well,

    I can name at least four Dutch lawyers who specialize on open source legality, one of them even being a University professor.

    But, since you and I are both located in France, I doubt it would convince your and your boss because these lawyers are of course no exports in French law.

    If you are still interested, just me me know and I will supply you with their contact details.

    Regards,

    Jeroen Baten

    Op 08-09-2025 om 11:07 schreef Vincent Hatakeyama:
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Jeroen Baten              | EMAIL :  JBATEN@I2RS.NL
 ____  _  __              | web   :  www.i2rs.nl
  |  )|_)(_               | tel   :  +31 (0)648519096
 _|_/_| \__)              | Frisolaan 16, 4101 JK, Culemborg, the Netherlands
    by Jeroen Baten - 03:01 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi all ! 

    Hope you're well.

    I just had an idea regarding that recurring topic about licences. (It's a draft idea ! maybe it's not a great idea ! but well)

    What about to have all OCA modules under double licences ? 
    (See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-licensing)

    - A licence AGPL. Can be installed on all odoo instances, but if modules depends on it, there have to be AGPL too. (contamination concept).

    - another licence that allows extra non AGPL modules to depends on it, but it is paid, OCA receiving the money.

    Use case 1 : you are a full OpenSource player, you install all the modules under AGPL licence  and you develop also under AGPL licence, so you redistribute all the work. (no changes)

    Use Case 2 : You develop extra modules under privative licence that don't depend on OCA modules. you can install your private modules and the OCA AGPL modules on the same instance. (no changes)

    Use Case 3 : You develop extra modules under privative licence that depends on OCA modules. You give some money to the OCA, that can continue to maintain that great work, over the years ! (new possibility)

    Pro :

    - some recurring revenu for OCA, specially for "core" OCA modules. I mean, web_responsive, report_xlsx, etc... (for exemple) are modules installed in most of customer instances, because there are "must have".

    - People that are using OCA modules contributes with code (derivated module under AGPL, like Tecnativa / GRAP / others actors) or money otherwise.

    - People who develop modules under the OCA do not feel that others are benefiting from them without contributing in return.

    - We provide a legal solution for many "closed sources" actors. (for the time being, I'm pretty sure that some OCA AGPL modules are installed with licence infringement) on many instances, because there is no solution (except redevelop the whole module, of course).

    - I talked many times with integrators that says that their customer doesn't want to share under AGPL licence the modules they pay. For the time being, there are no incitation to do it. But if tomorrow, there is maybe, more modules will be shared under AGPL ressources, that is great for Open Source Ecosystem.

    Cons :

    - I haven't thought about it, but there surely are !

    Questions : 

    @Jean-Charles Drubay, (and @other people in the same case) : you mentioned some modules (web_timeline, report_xlsx, etc..) you want to see under LGPL license to be able, to depend on it, in custom private modules. (I guess) Do you think that your customers could be agree to pay some euros per monthes for such features ? (In return, these modules would certainly be better maintained and migrated more quickly.)


    Shall we meet up for a beer and a chat ?

    See you on Sunday and the next week for some of you.


    Le Lundi, Septembre 08, 2025 13:57 CEST, Ivan Sokolov via Cetmix OÜ <notifications@odoo-community.org> a écrit:
     

    Internal communication: Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? [...] ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

    Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:

    • Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? Because it helps to widespread them being used as core parts in various deployments, including close-sourced. Pros: it builds vendors dependency forcing those non-OCA vendors to contribute to the OCA (well, at least part of them).
    • Business flow modules should stay AGPL for the very reasons mentioned by Pedro and Enric.

    Bonus: we might consider selling a non-AGPL licenses to those, who would like to have some AGPL modules but cannot use them due to the license incompatibility. Pros: we can get money from that. Cons: there are a lot of them either, so this is something to be discussed separately. Anyway I would like to have this discussion opened.

     

    Best regards,

    photograph
    Ivan Sokolov
    Cetmix Odoo Solutions
    cetmix.com
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram 
    This message is sent using Mail Messages Easy app

     

    ----- Original message -----
    Date: Sep 8, 2025, 1:32:07 PM
    From: Notifications
    Subject: Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
     
    Hello everyone,
     
    You’re right that Odoo’s relicensing from AGPL to LGPL contributed to their ecosystem’s growth, but I think it’s important to recognize the context. The growth was not solely because of LGPL being “friendlier,” but also because Odoo SA introduced a dual licensing model: they offered parts of the code under a proprietary license and could directly capture revenue from that. This created a business incentive that supported their expansion.

    In the OCA’s case, the situation is different:
    • If we moved from AGPL to LGPL, there would be no equivalent proprietary licensing model.
    • The benefits would mostly go to implementors who could build proprietary modules on top of LGPL community work.
    • The OCA itself would not receive revenue, nor would it strengthen the community commons — it would only dilute protections for contributors.
    Also, the OCA can have legal issue because there are contributors that didn't sign the SLA, as happened with vertical-medical 8 years ago (https://github.com/OCA/vertical-medical/issues/183)
     
    That’s why, for us, the decision isn’t only about adoption, but about ensuring contributors’ rights and the long-term sustainability of shared resources.

    I agree with you that clearer legal guidance and better communication to customers are necessary, and we should keep pushing for that. But from my perspective, simply shifting to LGPL without a mechanism to capture value (like Odoo SA did) risks weakening the community without strengthening OCA in return. For that reason, I would prefer to leave the decision of the license on each individual when adding a new module.

    Best regards,
     
    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 13:11, Pedro M. Baeza (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
     
     
    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    Powered by Messages Easy Pro

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



     
    by Sylvain LE GAL - 02:51 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Here are ressources urls I'm using to share the OCA point of views:

    * The FAQ mentioned by Enric: https://odoo-community.org/resources/faq


    Regards,
    Pierre

    Le lun. 8 sept. 2025 à 13:57, Ivan Sokolov via Cetmix OÜ <notifications@odoo-community.org> a écrit :
    Internal communication: Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? [...] ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​

    Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:

    • Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? Because it helps to widespread them being used as core parts in various deployments, including close-sourced. Pros: it builds vendors dependency forcing those non-OCA vendors to contribute to the OCA (well, at least part of them).
    • Business flow modules should stay AGPL for the very reasons mentioned by Pedro and Enric.

    Bonus: we might consider selling a non-AGPL licenses to those, who would like to have some AGPL modules but cannot use them due to the license incompatibility. Pros: we can get money from that. Cons: there are a lot of them either, so this is something to be discussed separately. Anyway I would like to have this discussion opened.


    Best regards,

    photograph
    Ivan Sokolov
     Cetmix Odoo Solutions
    cetmix.com
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram 
    This message is sent using Mail Messages Easy app


    ----- Original message -----
    Date: Sep 8, 2025, 1:32:07 PM
    From: Notifications
    Subject: Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hello everyone,

    You’re right that Odoo’s relicensing from AGPL to LGPL contributed to their ecosystem’s growth, but I think it’s important to recognize the context. The growth was not solely because of LGPL being “friendlier,” but also because Odoo SA introduced a dual licensing model: they offered parts of the code under a proprietary license and could directly capture revenue from that. This created a business incentive that supported their expansion.

    In the OCA’s case, the situation is different:
    • If we moved from AGPL to LGPL, there would be no equivalent proprietary licensing model.
    • The benefits would mostly go to implementors who could build proprietary modules on top of LGPL community work.
    • The OCA itself would not receive revenue, nor would it strengthen the community commons — it would only dilute protections for contributors.
    Also, the OCA can have legal issue because there are contributors that didn't sign the SLA, as happened with vertical-medical 8 years ago (https://github.com/OCA/vertical-medical/issues/183)

    That’s why, for us, the decision isn’t only about adoption, but about ensuring contributors’ rights and the long-term sustainability of shared resources.

    I agree with you that clearer legal guidance and better communication to customers are necessary, and we should keep pushing for that. But from my perspective, simply shifting to LGPL without a mechanism to capture value (like Odoo SA did) risks weakening the community without strengthening OCA in return. For that reason, I would prefer to leave the decision of the license on each individual when adding a new module.

    Best regards,

    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 13:11, Pedro M. Baeza (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:


    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    Powered by Messages Easy Pro

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    by Pierre Verkest - 02:25 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Internal communication: Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? [...] ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​

    Once again, as proposed above, I would suggest to have licenses based on module nature:

    • Core modules, eg widgets, api's, helpers - LGPL. Why? Because it helps to widespread them being used as core parts in various deployments, including close-sourced. Pros: it builds vendors dependency forcing those non-OCA vendors to contribute to the OCA (well, at least part of them).
    • Business flow modules should stay AGPL for the very reasons mentioned by Pedro and Enric.

    Bonus: we might consider selling a non-AGPL licenses to those, who would like to have some AGPL modules but cannot use them due to the license incompatibility. Pros: we can get money from that. Cons: there are a lot of them either, so this is something to be discussed separately. Anyway I would like to have this discussion opened.


    Best regards,

    photograph
    Ivan Sokolov
     Cetmix Odoo Solutions
    cetmix.com
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram 
    This message is sent using Mail Messages Easy app


    ----- Original message -----
    Date: Sep 8, 2025, 1:32:07 PM
    From: Notifications
    Subject: Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hello everyone,

    You’re right that Odoo’s relicensing from AGPL to LGPL contributed to their ecosystem’s growth, but I think it’s important to recognize the context. The growth was not solely because of LGPL being “friendlier,” but also because Odoo SA introduced a dual licensing model: they offered parts of the code under a proprietary license and could directly capture revenue from that. This created a business incentive that supported their expansion.

    In the OCA’s case, the situation is different:
    • If we moved from AGPL to LGPL, there would be no equivalent proprietary licensing model.
    • The benefits would mostly go to implementors who could build proprietary modules on top of LGPL community work.
    • The OCA itself would not receive revenue, nor would it strengthen the community commons — it would only dilute protections for contributors.
    Also, the OCA can have legal issue because there are contributors that didn't sign the SLA, as happened with vertical-medical 8 years ago (https://github.com/OCA/vertical-medical/issues/183)

    That’s why, for us, the decision isn’t only about adoption, but about ensuring contributors’ rights and the long-term sustainability of shared resources.

    I agree with you that clearer legal guidance and better communication to customers are necessary, and we should keep pushing for that. But from my perspective, simply shifting to LGPL without a mechanism to capture value (like Odoo SA did) risks weakening the community without strengthening OCA in return. For that reason, I would prefer to leave the decision of the license on each individual when adding a new module.

    Best regards,

    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 13:11, Pedro M. Baeza (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:


    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    Powered by Messages Easy Pro

    by "Ivan Sokolov via Cetmix OÜ" <team@cetmix.com> - 01:56 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi Enric,

    as we had a heated discussion lately already (thats unfortunately not yet over, you know what i mean), i believe we should not invest to much enthusiasm / emotion into that discussion for now. What is clear to me is that if we change something that must be build on a solid application of the (to be reworked / updated) governance structure of the OCA and therefore certainly also after a new board has been elected. In any case i am not proposing an all in strategy but rather a controlled experiement (maybe along the lines of the modules Ivan suggested and of course with the consent of all its PSC members). Nevertheless i will take on that topic as a "mind experiment" (among quite a few additional ones) in my talk regarding the future of the OCA next tuesday. Hopefully you will find time to take part at least remotely as your contributions to that and various other discussions are always very opinionated, valuable and insightful at the same time and help to enrich such a fundamental discussion.

    Best Frederik

    Am 08.09.25 um 13:32 schrieb Enric Tobella Alomar:
    Hello everyone,

    You’re right that Odoo’s relicensing from AGPL to LGPL contributed to their ecosystem’s growth, but I think it’s important to recognize the context. The growth was not solely because of LGPL being “friendlier,” but also because Odoo SA introduced a dual licensing model: they offered parts of the code under a proprietary license and could directly capture revenue from that. This created a business incentive that supported their expansion.

    In the OCA’s case, the situation is different:
    • If we moved from AGPL to LGPL, there would be no equivalent proprietary licensing model.
    • The benefits would mostly go to implementors who could build proprietary modules on top of LGPL community work.
    • The OCA itself would not receive revenue, nor would it strengthen the community commons — it would only dilute protections for contributors.
    Also, the OCA can have legal issue because there are contributors that didn't sign the SLA, as happened with vertical-medical 8 years ago (https://github.com/OCA/vertical-medical/issues/183)

    That’s why, for us, the decision isn’t only about adoption, but about ensuring contributors’ rights and the long-term sustainability of shared resources.

    I agree with you that clearer legal guidance and better communication to customers are necessary, and we should keep pushing for that. But from my perspective, simply shifting to LGPL without a mechanism to capture value (like Odoo SA did) risks weakening the community without strengthening OCA in return. For that reason, I would prefer to leave the decision of the license on each individual when adding a new module.

    Best regards,

    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 13:11, Pedro M. Baeza (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
    OCA should veil for the open source part of Odoo (https://odoo-community.org/about). Encouraging to use LGPL only favors the closed source part of the ecosystem, as you can mount on top OCA LGPL modules any private module, so people will only provide to/improve OCA base tools, while keeping by themselves the finished business solutions as private. That's why if we relicense even these base tools to LGPL, the real value provided by OCA will go down, only getting base/tool modules that are not finished business solutions. That's why we should force people to play with the same open source rules. And the tool for that is AGPL. Imagine if my company Tecnativa would retain their RMA, HR shift, resource booking, etc complete apps as private because technically they don't depend on AGPL code, what would OCA be without them?

    And this is not something that each individual should investigate, OCA should invest resources in assuring that there's no problem in this, and as this sometimes requires an initial jurisprudence case, to assure that if that case comes one day, OCA will provide the legal assistance. If none of these things happen, OCA would fail in its mission IMO.

    Regards.

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247
    by Frederik Kramer - 01:50 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Hello everyone,

    You’re right that Odoo’s relicensing from AGPL to LGPL contributed to their ecosystem’s growth, but I think it’s important to recognize the context. The growth was not solely because of LGPL being “friendlier,” but also because Odoo SA introduced a dual licensing model: they offered parts of the code under a proprietary license and could directly capture revenue from that. This created a business incentive that supported their expansion.

    In the OCA’s case, the situation is different:
    • If we moved from AGPL to LGPL, there would be no equivalent proprietary licensing model.
    • The benefits would mostly go to implementors who could build proprietary modules on top of LGPL community work.
    • The OCA itself would not receive revenue, nor would it strengthen the community commons — it would only dilute protections for contributors.
    Also, the OCA can have legal issue because there are contributors that didn't sign the SLA, as happened with vertical-medical 8 years ago (https://github.com/OCA/vertical-medical/issues/183)

    That’s why, for us, the decision isn’t only about adoption, but about ensuring contributors’ rights and the long-term sustainability of shared resources.

    I agree with you that clearer legal guidance and better communication to customers are necessary, and we should keep pushing for that. But from my perspective, simply shifting to LGPL without a mechanism to capture value (like Odoo SA did) risks weakening the community without strengthening OCA in return. For that reason, I would prefer to leave the decision of the license on each individual when adding a new module.

    Best regards,

    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 13:11, Pedro M. Baeza (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
    OCA should veil for the open source part of Odoo (https://odoo-community.org/about). Encouraging to use LGPL only favors the closed source part of the ecosystem, as you can mount on top OCA LGPL modules any private module, so people will only provide to/improve OCA base tools, while keeping by themselves the finished business solutions as private. That's why if we relicense even these base tools to LGPL, the real value provided by OCA will go down, only getting base/tool modules that are not finished business solutions. That's why we should force people to play with the same open source rules. And the tool for that is AGPL. Imagine if my company Tecnativa would retain their RMA, HR shift, resource booking, etc complete apps as private because technically they don't depend on AGPL code, what would OCA be without them?

    And this is not something that each individual should investigate, OCA should invest resources in assuring that there's no problem in this, and as this sometimes requires an initial jurisprudence case, to assure that if that case comes one day, OCA will provide the legal assistance. If none of these things happen, OCA would fail in its mission IMO.

    Regards.

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    by Enric Tobella Alomar - 01:30 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    OCA should veil for the open source part of Odoo (https://odoo-community.org/about). Encouraging to use LGPL only favors the closed source part of the ecosystem, as you can mount on top OCA LGPL modules any private module, so people will only provide to/improve OCA base tools, while keeping by themselves the finished business solutions as private. That's why if we relicense even these base tools to LGPL, the real value provided by OCA will go down, only getting base/tool modules that are not finished business solutions. That's why we should force people to play with the same open source rules. And the tool for that is AGPL. Imagine if my company Tecnativa would retain their RMA, HR shift, resource booking, etc complete apps as private because technically they don't depend on AGPL code, what would OCA be without them?

    And this is not something that each individual should investigate, OCA should invest resources in assuring that there's no problem in this, and as this sometimes requires an initial jurisprudence case, to assure that if that case comes one day, OCA will provide the legal assistance. If none of these things happen, OCA would fail in its mission IMO.

    Regards.
    by Pedro M. Baeza - 01:10 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Internal communication: If you consider those modules should be LGPL instead of AGPL you should open a PR like it was done eg here: https://github.com/OCA/web/pull/3184 [...] ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​

    If you consider those modules should be LGPL instead of AGPL you should open a PR like it was done eg here: https://github.com/OCA/web/pull/3184 or here https://github.com/OCA/web/pull/3053

    From my personal point of view, I think all widgets and generic core modules should be LGPL, while those that implement custom business logic - AGPL. However this is just my personal opinion.


    Best regards,

    photograph
    Ivan Sokolov
     Cetmix Odoo Solutions
    cetmix.com
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram 
    This message is sent using Mail Messages Easy app


    ----- Original message -----
    Date: Sep 8, 2025, 12:37:12 PM
    From: Notifications
    Subject: Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi,

    Should the conclusion of this discussion be published on https://odoo-community.org/ ? It would really help for the  future.

    About personal opinion, I also find that LGPL is not blocking Open Source contributions, on the contrary.

    I find it difficult to work with AGPL modules, the constraints are too strict. As an example, the below modules being AGPL is really painful. They are base modules to build a lot of other modules on top which could be OPL, and this would encourage more contribution back into these modules:
    Regards,

    Jean-Charles Drubay, Komit


    On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 5:07 PM Frederik Kramer <notifications@odoo-community.org> wrote:

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    Powered by Messages Easy Pro

    by "Ivan Sokolov via Cetmix OÜ" <team@cetmix.com> - 01:00 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Hi,

    Should the conclusion of this discussion be published on https://odoo-community.org/ ? It would really help for the  future.

    About personal opinion, I also find that LGPL is not blocking Open Source contributions, on the contrary.

    I find it difficult to work with AGPL modules, the constraints are too strict. As an example, the below modules being AGPL is really painful. They are base modules to build a lot of other modules on top which could be OPL, and this would encourage more contribution back into these modules:
    Regards,

    Jean-Charles Drubay, Komit


    On Mon, Sep 8, 2025 at 5:07 PM Frederik Kramer <notifications@odoo-community.org> wrote:
    Hi Pedro,

i personally doubt that this would be the end. You know i am a Open 
Source lover from the deepest of my heart.

There is also research that suggest evidence that weak or non copyleft 
license are even dominant. See 
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923611001242 for 
reference

Anyway its certainly beyond me personally take decisions on that matter. 
This is solely each PSCs individual choice i guess (not even a global 
one). The only thing i see is that we potentially dillute the total 
economic power (as measure by integrators their developers to contribute 
or commercial entities of users supporting the community with money or 
hiring their own engineers and let them contribute) to maintain a given 
body of moduls by a potentially wrong choice.

But probably we can discuss that next week f2f. Looking forward to see 
you there

Best Frederik


Am 08.09.25 um 11:42 schrieb Pedro M. Baeza:


> Please no, don't move AGPL to LGPL. That would be the end of open 


> source and OCA. There's no ambivalence about the current OCA's 


> position. Enric has pointed out the basis on that.


>


> Regards.


>


> _______________________________________________


> Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15


> Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org


> Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe


>


-- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    by Jean-Charles Drubay - 12:36 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi Enric,

    thanks for your feedback. I personally tried 1.) many times and in various cases.However, with limited success as soon as the lawyer has his / her say. But i do admit that the whole concept of Open Source Licensing in many cases lacks solid proficiency among many entities that actually use Odoo and OCA code. 

    Although i like 2.), i believe that even this would not help to convince the lawyers in the first place ;-) To much research has been done on that and to much and too visibly the whole industry (if i am allowed to name the Open Source world an industry) has abandoned strong copyleft licensing in favour of weak or non-copyleft licensing.

    Remember we all had our concerns when Odoo changed AGPL to LGPL but what happend (apart from some proprietary product being developed atop of Odoo, which all largly remain small) the Odoo ecosystem itself grew quite substantially. I doubt that this would have been the case, had S.A. decided not to do so (but of course "One swallow does not make a summer")

    Cheers Frederik

    Am 08.09.25 um 11:56 schrieb Enric Tobella Alomar:

    Hello Fred,

    Thanks for your comments.

    I agree that in practice, many enterprise legal teams take a very cautious view, which can discourage the use of AGPL modules regardless of the actual legal analysis. However, as changing the license to LGPL is not an option for our contributions (at least for me), we believe a more constructive way forward is twofold:

    1. Customer and integrator education.
      By providing clear explanations of the OCA’s interpretation (when AGPL obligations apply and when coexistence is acceptable), we can help clients understand the boundaries and make informed decisions rather than rejecting AGPL code by default. Improving the communication in this topic in OCA website could help a lot.

    2. Community-level legal guidance.
      Rather than each integrator seeking fragmented advice, it would be more effective if the OCA coordinated with recognized open source licensing experts to produce a global legal statement. Such a document could clarify the reasoning behind OCA’s position and provide integrators with an authoritative reference point to present to enterprise clients.

    This approach could help reduce concerns for customers, avoid unnecessary dilution of AGPL contributions, and give the community a unified, credible position without forcing a change in licensing, which shouldn't be an option IMO.

    You should remember that by using AGPL, we are empowering the community and forcing external entities to collaborate. If we leave LGPL, new developments will not be inside the OCA and we will loose traction and power. That is not an option for me.

    Best regards,


    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 11:46, Frederik Kramer (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:

    Hi Enric, hi vincent,

    thanks Enric to write the OCA stance in such clarity. As we are both members of the community and therefore often involved in this debate I personally tend to agree on that very stance. However, as an integrator often face with customer demand i can also firmly report that this IS an issue among synidicus laywers in many commercial enterprises in many cases leading to the dismissal of all AGPL licenced code, hence dilluting potential contribution to its maintainance.

    As the OCA - through the CLA / ICLA process - "technically" has all rights to defend its legal "interpretation" i thould theoretically be enough to trust (even larger commercial entities) that it will ultimately hold true if somebody litigates a lawsuite but practice imho looks quite different from theory on that matter.

    Best Frederik

    Am 08.09.25 um 11:22 schrieb Enric Tobella Alomar:
    Hello Vincent,

    From a legal standpoint, the issue centers on whether proprietary modules that are installed on the same Odoo instance as AGPL-licensed modules are to be considered derivative works of those AGPL modules. The AGPL license imposes its obligations (notably source code disclosure under AGPL terms) only when a work is derivative or based upon the AGPL-licensed code.

    The OCA’s position—that AGPL and proprietary modules can coexist on the same instance provided there is no dependency relationship—is grounded in the following reasoning:

    1. Modularity and independence.
      An Odoo module is legally treated as a separate work. If a proprietary module does not include, link to, or depend on an AGPL module, it is not derivative, and the AGPL obligations are not triggered. Simply running them side by side in the same Odoo instance does not in itself create a derivative work. It is like having two processes, one AGPL and one private in your computer.

    2. Dependencies as the critical factor.
      If a proprietary module declares a dependency (via the depends key in the manifest) on an AGPL module, or reuses AGPL code, then it would be considered derivative and therefore must also be licensed under the AGPL. In contrast, if dependencies are only on LGPL modules (as is the case with the Odoo core and most OCA libraries), coexistence is legally permissible.

    3. Distinction with Odoo SA’s position.
      The 2015 Odoo SA statement reflects a more restrictive view, primarily aimed at encouraging module authors to relicense under LGPL. That stance is a policy choice rather than a strict reading of the AGPL. The legal baseline under copyright law is that AGPL requirements are triggered only by derivation, not by mere colocation on the same server.

    In short: the AGPL license does not prohibit running AGPL and proprietary modules on the same instance, provided the proprietary modules do not depend on or incorporate AGPL code. This is the legal basis for the OCA FAQ.

    If the propietary modules doesn't rely on the AGPL module, it shouldn't be a problem, as they can exist independently, so the private is not derivative of the AGPL and they can coexist.

    Kind regards,


    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 11:07, Vincent Hatakeyama (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247
    by Frederik Kramer - 12:20 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server 
    Hi Pedro,

i personally doubt that this would be the end. You know i am a Open 
Source lover from the deepest of my heart.

There is also research that suggest evidence that weak or non copyleft 
license are even dominant. See 
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923611001242 for 
reference

Anyway its certainly beyond me personally take decisions on that matter. 
This is solely each PSCs individual choice i guess (not even a global 
one). The only thing i see is that we potentially dillute the total 
economic power (as measure by integrators their developers to contribute 
or commercial entities of users supporting the community with money or 
hiring their own engineers and let them contribute) to maintain a given 
body of moduls by a potentially wrong choice.

But probably we can discuss that next week f2f. Looking forward to see 
you there

Best Frederik


Am 08.09.25 um 11:42 schrieb Pedro M. Baeza:

> Please no, don't move AGPL to LGPL. That would be the end of open 

> source and OCA. There's no ambivalence about the current OCA's 

> position. Enric has pointed out the basis on that.

>

> Regards.

>

> _______________________________________________

> Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15

> Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org

> Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

>

-- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247
    by Frederik Kramer - 12:06 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hello Fred,

    Thanks for your comments.

    I agree that in practice, many enterprise legal teams take a very cautious view, which can discourage the use of AGPL modules regardless of the actual legal analysis. However, as changing the license to LGPL is not an option for our contributions (at least for me), we believe a more constructive way forward is twofold:

    1. Customer and integrator education.
      By providing clear explanations of the OCA’s interpretation (when AGPL obligations apply and when coexistence is acceptable), we can help clients understand the boundaries and make informed decisions rather than rejecting AGPL code by default. Improving the communication in this topic in OCA website could help a lot.

    2. Community-level legal guidance.
      Rather than each integrator seeking fragmented advice, it would be more effective if the OCA coordinated with recognized open source licensing experts to produce a global legal statement. Such a document could clarify the reasoning behind OCA’s position and provide integrators with an authoritative reference point to present to enterprise clients.

    This approach could help reduce concerns for customers, avoid unnecessary dilution of AGPL contributions, and give the community a unified, credible position without forcing a change in licensing, which shouldn't be an option IMO.

    You should remember that by using AGPL, we are empowering the community and forcing external entities to collaborate. If we leave LGPL, new developments will not be inside the OCA and we will loose traction and power. That is not an option for me.

    Best regards,


    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 11:46, Frederik Kramer (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:

    Hi Enric, hi vincent,

    thanks Enric to write the OCA stance in such clarity. As we are both members of the community and therefore often involved in this debate I personally tend to agree on that very stance. However, as an integrator often face with customer demand i can also firmly report that this IS an issue among synidicus laywers in many commercial enterprises in many cases leading to the dismissal of all AGPL licenced code, hence dilluting potential contribution to its maintainance.

    As the OCA - through the CLA / ICLA process - "technically" has all rights to defend its legal "interpretation" i thould theoretically be enough to trust (even larger commercial entities) that it will ultimately hold true if somebody litigates a lawsuite but practice imho looks quite different from theory on that matter.

    Best Frederik

    Am 08.09.25 um 11:22 schrieb Enric Tobella Alomar:
    Hello Vincent,

    From a legal standpoint, the issue centers on whether proprietary modules that are installed on the same Odoo instance as AGPL-licensed modules are to be considered derivative works of those AGPL modules. The AGPL license imposes its obligations (notably source code disclosure under AGPL terms) only when a work is derivative or based upon the AGPL-licensed code.

    The OCA’s position—that AGPL and proprietary modules can coexist on the same instance provided there is no dependency relationship—is grounded in the following reasoning:

    1. Modularity and independence.
      An Odoo module is legally treated as a separate work. If a proprietary module does not include, link to, or depend on an AGPL module, it is not derivative, and the AGPL obligations are not triggered. Simply running them side by side in the same Odoo instance does not in itself create a derivative work. It is like having two processes, one AGPL and one private in your computer.

    2. Dependencies as the critical factor.
      If a proprietary module declares a dependency (via the depends key in the manifest) on an AGPL module, or reuses AGPL code, then it would be considered derivative and therefore must also be licensed under the AGPL. In contrast, if dependencies are only on LGPL modules (as is the case with the Odoo core and most OCA libraries), coexistence is legally permissible.

    3. Distinction with Odoo SA’s position.
      The 2015 Odoo SA statement reflects a more restrictive view, primarily aimed at encouraging module authors to relicense under LGPL. That stance is a policy choice rather than a strict reading of the AGPL. The legal baseline under copyright law is that AGPL requirements are triggered only by derivation, not by mere colocation on the same server.

    In short: the AGPL license does not prohibit running AGPL and proprietary modules on the same instance, provided the proprietary modules do not depend on or incorporate AGPL code. This is the legal basis for the OCA FAQ.

    If the propietary modules doesn't rely on the AGPL module, it shouldn't be a problem, as they can exist independently, so the private is not derivative of the AGPL and they can coexist.

    Kind regards,


    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 11:07, Vincent Hatakeyama (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    by Enric Tobella Alomar - 11:56 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi Enric, hi vincent,

    thanks Enric to write the OCA stance in such clarity. As we are both members of the community and therefore often involved in this debate I personally tend to agree on that very stance. However, as an integrator often face with customer demand i can also firmly report that this IS an issue among synidicus laywers in many commercial enterprises in many cases leading to the dismissal of all AGPL licenced code, hence dilluting potential contribution to its maintainance.

    As the OCA - through the CLA / ICLA process - "technically" has all rights to defend its legal "interpretation" i thould theoretically be enough to trust (even larger commercial entities) that it will ultimately hold true if somebody litigates a lawsuite but practice imho looks quite different from theory on that matter.

    Best Frederik

    Am 08.09.25 um 11:22 schrieb Enric Tobella Alomar:
    Hello Vincent,

    From a legal standpoint, the issue centers on whether proprietary modules that are installed on the same Odoo instance as AGPL-licensed modules are to be considered derivative works of those AGPL modules. The AGPL license imposes its obligations (notably source code disclosure under AGPL terms) only when a work is derivative or based upon the AGPL-licensed code.

    The OCA’s position—that AGPL and proprietary modules can coexist on the same instance provided there is no dependency relationship—is grounded in the following reasoning:

    1. Modularity and independence.
      An Odoo module is legally treated as a separate work. If a proprietary module does not include, link to, or depend on an AGPL module, it is not derivative, and the AGPL obligations are not triggered. Simply running them side by side in the same Odoo instance does not in itself create a derivative work. It is like having two processes, one AGPL and one private in your computer.

    2. Dependencies as the critical factor.
      If a proprietary module declares a dependency (via the depends key in the manifest) on an AGPL module, or reuses AGPL code, then it would be considered derivative and therefore must also be licensed under the AGPL. In contrast, if dependencies are only on LGPL modules (as is the case with the Odoo core and most OCA libraries), coexistence is legally permissible.

    3. Distinction with Odoo SA’s position.
      The 2015 Odoo SA statement reflects a more restrictive view, primarily aimed at encouraging module authors to relicense under LGPL. That stance is a policy choice rather than a strict reading of the AGPL. The legal baseline under copyright law is that AGPL requirements are triggered only by derivation, not by mere colocation on the same server.

    In short: the AGPL license does not prohibit running AGPL and proprietary modules on the same instance, provided the proprietary modules do not depend on or incorporate AGPL code. This is the legal basis for the OCA FAQ.

    If the propietary modules doesn't rely on the AGPL module, it shouldn't be a problem, as they can exist independently, so the private is not derivative of the AGPL and they can coexist.

    Kind regards,


    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 11:07, Vincent Hatakeyama (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247
    by Frederik Kramer - 11:45 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Please no, don't move AGPL to LGPL. That would be the end of open source and OCA. There's no ambivalence about the current OCA's position. Enric has pointed out the basis on that.

    Regards.
    by Pedro M. Baeza - 11:40 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi Vincent,

    If you need a lawyer very proficient in answering Open Source Licensing stuff feel free to contact me personally, i can recommend somebody from my network. That said, even though i know Odoo's statement in relation to the license change from 2015 and the official stance of the OCA (from the website) and i personally (being a researcher on Open Source) lean toward the OCA official notion, i'd really encourage two things

    1.) PSC moving their contributions from AGPL to LGPLv3 (to make thinks less ambivalent)

    2.) Legal investigation of the validity of claims done by Odoo and OCA on the matter

    because they matter a lot since long and more and more potential Odoo (framework) users need to deal with that question

    Best Frederik


    Am 08.09.25 um 11:07 schrieb Vincent Hatakeyama:
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    -- 
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer
Geschäftsführer

initOS GmbH
Innungsstraße 7
21244 Buchholz i.d.N.

Tel:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 12
Fax:   +49 (0) 4181 13503 10
Mobil: +49 (0) 179 3901819

Email: frederik.kramer@initos.com
Internet: www.initos.com

Geschäftsführung:
Dr.-Ing. Frederik Kramer & Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Torsten Francke

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buchholz i.d.N.
Amtsgericht Tostedt, HRB 205226
USt-IdNr.: DE815580155
Steuer-Nr: 15/200/53247
    by Frederik Kramer - 11:31 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Hello Vincent,

    From a legal standpoint, the issue centers on whether proprietary modules that are installed on the same Odoo instance as AGPL-licensed modules are to be considered derivative works of those AGPL modules. The AGPL license imposes its obligations (notably source code disclosure under AGPL terms) only when a work is derivative or based upon the AGPL-licensed code.

    The OCA’s position—that AGPL and proprietary modules can coexist on the same instance provided there is no dependency relationship—is grounded in the following reasoning:

    1. Modularity and independence.
      An Odoo module is legally treated as a separate work. If a proprietary module does not include, link to, or depend on an AGPL module, it is not derivative, and the AGPL obligations are not triggered. Simply running them side by side in the same Odoo instance does not in itself create a derivative work. It is like having two processes, one AGPL and one private in your computer.

    2. Dependencies as the critical factor.
      If a proprietary module declares a dependency (via the depends key in the manifest) on an AGPL module, or reuses AGPL code, then it would be considered derivative and therefore must also be licensed under the AGPL. In contrast, if dependencies are only on LGPL modules (as is the case with the Odoo core and most OCA libraries), coexistence is legally permissible.

    3. Distinction with Odoo SA’s position.
      The 2015 Odoo SA statement reflects a more restrictive view, primarily aimed at encouraging module authors to relicense under LGPL. That stance is a policy choice rather than a strict reading of the AGPL. The legal baseline under copyright law is that AGPL requirements are triggered only by derivation, not by mere colocation on the same server.

    In short: the AGPL license does not prohibit running AGPL and proprietary modules on the same instance, provided the proprietary modules do not depend on or incorporate AGPL code. This is the legal basis for the OCA FAQ.

    If the propietary modules doesn't rely on the AGPL module, it shouldn't be a problem, as they can exist independently, so the private is not derivative of the AGPL and they can coexist.

    Kind regards,


    El lun, 8 sept 2025 a las 11:07, Vincent Hatakeyama (<notifications@odoo-community.org>) escribió:
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe



    --
    Enric Tobella Alomar
    CEO & Founder

    by Enric Tobella Alomar - 11:21 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    I should have pointed out that I’m starting to believe my CEO is right.
    Concerning professionnel legal advice, he told me that he never find out someone capable of replying to licence questions concerning open source.

    I’m concerned, as the head of the department, of not doing something correctly and was curious about why it is written on the OCA website something that looks incorrect.

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    by "Vincent Hatakeyama" <vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io> - 11:06 - 8 Sep 2025
  • Re: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server
    Internal communication: Well, the same that your CEO believes or doesn't believe in something doesn't change the way that "something" works. With this said, I would [...] ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​ ͏ ​

    Well, the same that your CEO believes or doesn't believe in something doesn't change the way that "something" works.  With this said, I would recommend to get some professional legal expertise to make your CEO happy. Because I highly doubt your CEO will believe in something written in a mailing list.

    Best regards,

    photograph
    Ivan Sokolov
     Cetmix Odoo Solutions
    cetmix.com
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Instagram 
    This message is sent using Mail Messages Easy app


    ----- Original message -----
    Date: Sep 8, 2025, 10:37:27 AM
    From: Notifications
    Subject: Licence question: using AGPL and Odoo proprietary modules on the same server

    Hi,

    After years of only working on Odoo community, we are starting to have several enterprise clients.

    The OCA website at https://odoo-community.org/resources/faq indicates:
    Can I run OCA AGPL modules and closed source modules on the same instance?
    Yes, as long as closed source modules do not depend on AGPL ones and respect the license of its dependencies defined in the “depends” key of its manifest file (and vice versa).


    Will we be able to use AGPL modules and paid ones?

    Odoo projects will be able to use AGPL modules or paid modules under proprietary licenses, but it is not possible to combine both. Combining LGLPv3 modules and proprietary modules is fine however, so we encourage current owners licensing under AGPL to move to LGPLv3 too, in order to avoid complications for end users.

    My CEO believes that this using both AGPL and proprietary modules, even if they do not have dependencies, is not allowed by the AGPL license.
    I’ve searched a bit on the mailing list (that started in 2015) but I have not found no discussion on the subject.
    On what basis does the OCA position comes from?

    Regards,
    --
    Vincent Hatakeyama
    Directeur du pôle développement " Orbeet
    Tel +33 1 83 62 72 88 Email vincent.hatakeyama@orbeet.io
    Adresse 27, boulevard Saint-Martin
    75003 Paris         		Site web https://orbeet.io
    Image bannière

    _______________________________________________
    Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15
    Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org
    Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe

    Powered by Messages Easy Pro

    by "Ivan Sokolov via Cetmix OÜ" <team@cetmix.com> - 10:56 - 8 Sep 2025