Contributors

Thank you Tom.

Indeed the other thread reads that it is related to overlapping core issues.

Developing the Governance work-group may be a good place to start. I haven't been very active within OCA as I am now less involved in the details of the software however I am interested in supporting the organisational strategy through this or other groups. Having been involved with Odoo since the start and OCA since early days, various thoughts have developed as to the direction that OCA and ecosystem might take - there is great potential.

I can't make OCA days unfortunately however welcome discussing these matters at the expo or during an evening.

Best wishes,

Stuart.

Stuart, +10 to this. We must resolve our issues as a community.

You must have also followed the other thread which started with contribution statistics and evolved into questions of governance. It is all interrelated: what is the OCA mission, how does the OCA organize itself to execute it, who decides. And how can we remain united.

There will be space in the OCA days to come together in person and discuss these issues, but, since the matters are complex, and not everyone is there, this will not be enough time.

The best idea I can come up with so far as a path towards actual resolution is, in coming months, to add more people with experience to what currently is the "Governance Workgroup". Or a new workgroup around Mission or the like. I think for good perspectives we also need people like you there, who have experience in other open source communites, so that we don't stare blindly only at what we know.

With such a group we would be able to work out proposals and go over them with all stakeholders, external experts, and then bring it to an assembly. A new board can facilitate this, but can't do this alone.

-Tom

13 sep. 2025 10:13:40 Stuart J Mackintosh <notifications@odoo-community.org>:

This is a valuable thread and I really do appreciate the effort that each has put in to their points.

The conversation has veered from the original licence question and again highlighted unresolved issues within this community. These themes are also current across other FLOSS communities.

To give an external perspective, my work with leading the Perl and Raku Foundation is less impacted by these matters simply as most Perl modules and software are MIT or Artistic licence. This permissiveness has enabled wide adoption and least resistance across the user base. All who contribute their time to Perl and Raku do this in the knowledge that companies do and will take their work, use for profit, and may not give anything back. Many volunteers are sponsored by their employers and some are funded by the Foundation. The Foundation is funded by a very small minority of organisations, most SME, who's businesses depend on Perl. The Foundation plays an active role in funding, governance and IP management, and it takes a critical leadership role when community matters get stuck.

In my view, the different positions in this thread relate more to different desired outcomes, and I feel that these would be useful to define - what is it you want to make happen. It may be that different outcomes can be accommodated once understood, then the mechanism for licensing may become less contentious.

My position: Odoo (software) is significant because of the Open Source commitment in the early days and this must be protected if the ecosystem, core and modules are to sustain in the long run (whatever Odoo S.A. choose to do). It must be set up so it can't later be unwound - my business needs confidence in a solid legal and technical base to build upon.

Maybe we need to open new subjects:

1. How to generate more contributors to OCA Projects

- Odoo (software) is gaining wider global acknowledgement
- Open Source is accepted (even sought) as part of general business - the pie is growing
- Uncertainty repels contributors
- What are the actions? Who will do them?

2. How can licensing be used to deliver desired outcomes of the OCA ecosystem

- First - what are the desired outcomes?
- There is lack of clarity as to how AGPL requirements are triggered (derived works) - should OCA invite advice from active legal person in the field?
- Should licence violations be pointed out?

3. What must the OCA do to lead the community on this matter?

- Convene workshops, online or in person
- Take opinions on board, make decisions and set direction
- How to drive these points forward without exhausting everyone


It would be great to have these discussions facilitated in person around OCA days or the Expo (I can't be at OCA days, I will be at the Expo next to OCA).

I hope this can be resolved and we can move on to immediate subjects like security and consideration of CRA, PLD and other EU regulations, understand if the OCA takes the position of legal steward in light of these new policy demands, plus developing the OCA and generating business for the ecosystem.

My final thought is that there isn't a right or wrong answer, but to respect the time of all involved, we must get to an answer.

Best wishes,

Stuart.

--

Stuart J Mackintosh

Business & digital technology consultant

Open Digital Consulting Co

UK: +44 20 36 27 90 40

FR: +33 1 89 48 00 40

Email: sjm@opendigital.cc

Web: https://opendigital.cc

IM: xmpp:sjm@opendigital.cc

_______________________________________________
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