| chat.freenode.net #tryton log beginning Fri Feb 6 00:00:01 CET 2009 | ||
| 2009-02-06 00:54 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 1341:220295b983f4 trytond/trytond/osv/fields.py: Fix search in reference to allow inactive records | ||
| 2009-02-06 00:54 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 1342:1379f56cd204 trytond/trytond/sql_db.py: Use cursor query to display wrong SQL | ||
| 2009-02-06 00:54 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 401:5d28409f0760 stock/location.py: | ||
| 2009-02-06 00:54 <CIA-10> tryton: Check context value in get_quantity on stock.location | ||
| 2009-02-06 00:54 <CIA-10> tryton: Verify that the product id from context has a real product record | ||
| 2009-02-06 00:54 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 402:1a2d3bb157eb stock/location.py: Check context value in view_header_get on stock.location | ||
| 2009-02-06 01:23 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 265:939a5a35e9ef website/ (7 files in 6 dirs): Remove ohloh javascript to speed up load of page | ||
| 2009-02-06 02:38 -!- vengfulsquirrel(n=ian@c-71-202-125-182.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has left #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 03:36 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.102.217.238) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 05:19 -!- yangoon1(n=mathiasb@p549F47ED.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 05:25 -!- johbo(n=joh@statdsl-085-016-072-173.ewe-ip-backbone.de) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:48 -!- bechamel(n=user@85.201.86.139) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:49 -!- sharkcz(n=dan@plz1-v-4-17.static.adsl.vol.cz) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:51 -!- snowch(n=snowch@82.152.13.57) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:51 <snowch> morning! | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:54 <CIA-10> tryton: udono roundup * #769/UnboundLocalError: local variable 'object_id' referenced before assignment: [new] This error happens on installing stock module in 1.0 [Thu Feb 05 18:13:43 2009] ERROR:init:Error while parsing xml file: In tag record: mode ... | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:56 -!- Timitos(n=Timitos@88.217.184.172) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 07:59 -!- snowch(n=snowch@82.152.13.57) has left #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:05 -!- Gedd(n=ged@77.109.112.132) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:34 -!- paola(n=paola@host-84-223-76-210.cust-adsl.tiscali.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:38 -!- cristi_an(i=5978d3ce@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-2c3f375892aa54b3) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:38 <cristi_an> bechamel: why invoices are by defautl without taxes ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:39 <cristi_an> bechamel: most of invoices 90% have to include taxes (vat) no ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:39 <cristi_an> for customers in the same country. | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:40 <bechamel> cristi_an: taxes come from products, so you must add taxes on products first | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:40 <cristi_an> and taxes on the invoice are ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:40 <cristi_an> there is some add taxes | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:40 <cristi_an> those do not come by default from products | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:40 <cristi_an> ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:42 <bechamel> cristi_an: you defined taxes on products and they don't appear on the invoice ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:42 <cristi_an> let me recheck | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:45 <CIA-10> tryton: bch roundup * #769/UnboundLocalError: local variable 'object_id' referenced before assignment: [chatting] This patch corrects the bug, this reflect the same code in the trunk. I don't know if the patch is not already planned. | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> on demo | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> i defined | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> update tax on product A | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> for customers i put like tax = 19% | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> but when i do the invoice | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> tax = 0 | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:49 <cristi_an> despite it aqpper on left bottom small table with taxes | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:52 <bechamel> cristi_an: you talk about invoice with id 2 on demo.tryton.org ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:52 <cristi_an> yes | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:52 <cristi_an> or 3 | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:53 <bechamel> cristi_an: percentage on the tax is 0.0 | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:53 <bechamel> cristi_an: the tax computation is not based on the tax name :) | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:54 <cristi_an> maybe i defined it worng... | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:54 <cristi_an> where can i change taxes | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:54 <cristi_an> ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:55 <bechamel> cristi_an: fincancial mgnt > config > taxes > taxes | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:57 <cristi_an> bechamel: thx | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:57 <cristi_an> bechamel: one more thing | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:57 <cristi_an> sequence what does represent there ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:57 <cristi_an> on taxes | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:58 <cristi_an> and childs ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 08:58 <cristi_an> :) | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:00 <bechamel> cristi_an: it's for some advanceed usage, for example some eco-taxes need to be applied before any other tax (but i don't rememeber if the other taxes increase with the eco-taxe), another example is Quebec where tax are also complicated (quebec taxes are combined with candian ones) | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:01 <cristi_an> bechamel: and sequence ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:04 <bechamel> cristi_an: sequence is for the same purpose, but I don't exactly when to use child taxe or when to use sequence | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:06 <cristi_an> thx | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:06 <cristi_an> A LOT | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:06 <cristi_an> ! | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:08 <udono> bechamel: cristi_an: Good morning | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:09 <udono> In germany we have some taxes with 0% taxfree. But we need them to show on invoices. Is this possible? | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:09 <udono> Timitos: ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:09 <cristi_an> hi there | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:10 <bechamel> udono: is it not enough to put percentage to 0.0 ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:11 <udono> yes, percentage needed to be 0.0. But the Tax need to be shown as a '0% Taxfree invoice'. | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:11 <Timitos> udono: yes. i think this is possible. but i have worked on that in the middel of the last year. so i do not remember if it really works | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:11 <Timitos> udono: percentage can be 0.0. this has been changed by cedk on my advice | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:12 <Timitos> but i am not sure, if there is created a tax line for such a tax. must be tested | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:12 <udono> ah, ok. Then I misunderstood cristi_an request in the demodatabase... Sorry | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:14 <cristi_an> udono: thx | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:14 <bechamel> Timitos, udono: yes a tax line is created when percentage is 0.0 (the problem of cristi_an was precisely that the tax was created but the amount was still 0) | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:15 <Timitos> bechamel: udono: so for me everything is correct | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:17 <cristi_an> it works ok | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:17 <cristi_an> i was not pyed attention when deinfing taxes | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:17 -!- nicoe(n=nicoe@ip-80-236-205-59.dsl.scarlet.be) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:23 <udono> On a field in a view I can set the attribute search="1". Is there a way to pre set the search term? The behavior is like restricting a search with domains or search rules, but the user can change the entry himself. | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:25 <udono> BTW, it's a new topic not related to the previous discussion... | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:26 -!- snowch(n=snowch@82.152.13.57) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:27 <udono> Example: party_role defines Supplier, Customer, etc. On an Customer invoice it would be good, when I search for the party to be invoiced, that only partys shown with party_type=="Customer". But the user should be able to change or clear the search_term by himsef. | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:31 -!- carlos(n=carlos@89.7.24.44) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:34 <udono> The same function can be used for account_types when choosing accounts on different places in Tryton. Often there are all accounts shown when only a small subset makes sense. | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:36 <bechamel> udono: there is no way to do this, either you put a domain on the field (but in this case the user cannot override it) or you leave it like that. but it's not possible to put default value on search fields | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:37 <Timitos> bechamel: but something like a filter would be a nice feature. i already talked about that with yangoon too | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:37 <snowch> bechamel: the refactored code is looking very nice! | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:38 <udono> bechamel: So it's a feature request. | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:39 <bechamel> udono: yes it's a feature request, but nothing prevent you from adding it to the tracker | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:39 <udono> bechamel: yes, on the way :-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:39 <bechamel> snowch: most of the refactoring is made by cedk | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:42 <snowch> bechamel: will references to psycopg2 in places like server.py be refactored to backend? | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:43 <bechamel> snowch: yes | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:45 <CIA-10> tryton: udono roundup * #770/Preselecting search terms in search views: [new] On a field in a view I can set the attribute search="1". Is there a way to pre set the search term? The behavior is like restricting a searc ... | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:45 <snowch> bechamel: great! thanks for the info... | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:46 <bechamel> snowch: the funny think is that the psycopg stuff in server.py is for exception around pooler method, but pooler itself has abstracted psycopg references, maybe one should ask cedk about this | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:49 -!- simahawk(n=simao@ppp-157-62.21-151.libero.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:50 <bechamel> afk | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:50 <snowch> ok, thanks. | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:54 -!- snowch(n=snowch@82.152.13.57) has left #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:55 -!- cedk(n=ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:58 -!- simahawk(n=simao@ppp-157-62.21-151.libero.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 09:58 -!- Timito1(n=Timitos@88.217.184.172) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 10:09 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 1343:72d96c1dcb74 trytond/trytond/osv/orm.py: Fix typo for issue769 | ||
| 2009-02-06 10:10 <CIA-10> tryton: ced roundup * #769/UnboundLocalError: local variable 'object_id' referenced before assignment: [resolved] Fixed. It was only on the mercurial version. | ||
| 2009-02-06 10:27 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 1521:224c5a40b3fb trytond/trytond/ (backend/database.py backend/postgresql/database.py server.py): Remove psycopg2 from server.py | ||
| 2009-02-06 10:53 -!- enlightx(n=enlightx@host-84-220-89-221.cust-adsl.tiscali.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 11:23 -!- udono(n=udono@dynamic-unidsl-85-197-23-64.westend.de) has left #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 11:24 -!- udono(n=udono@dynamic-unidsl-85-197-23-64.westend.de) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 12:27 -!- oversize(n=manuel@port-92-198-7-97.static.qsc.de) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 12:32 <CIA-10> tryton: ced roundup * #770/Preselecting search terms in search views: [resolved] It already exist. You must set in the field search_value of ir.action.act_window a dictionary with field names as key and search value ... | ||
| 2009-02-06 12:32 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.120.137.175) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 13:09 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.120.131.83) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:08 -!- ikks_(n=igor@190.144.69.234) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:13 -!- Gedd(n=ged@77.109.112.132) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:16 <CIA-10> tryton: udo.spallek * r435 /wiki/InstallationOnDebian.wiki: Edited wiki page through web user interface. | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:37 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.102.208.161) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:43 <udono> Hi cedk, thanks for the great news on https://bugs.tryton.org/roundup/msg2869 Is there some example in a Module for this? | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:53 <cedk> udono: no | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:53 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 1176:cdec12877054 tryton/TODO: Add todo for default value on search fields | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:53 <cedk> udono: I just add a todo to improve it with your idea of 'set default value' | ||
| 2009-02-06 14:54 <cedk> udono: I think it will be better than what we have now | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:39 -!- fp(n=fp@91.179.38.172) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:42 -!- cristi_an(i=5978d3ce@gateway/web/ajax/mibbit.com/x-ea7a14691521783c) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:43 <cristi_an> i am late maybe bu thave you seen what nice site open erp done. | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:43 <cristi_an> ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:47 <cedk> cristi_an: website still slow | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:47 <cedk> cristi_an: some links failed | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:47 <cristi_an> i did not noticved that.... | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:47 <cristi_an> anyway it is better to start being perfect | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:48 <cristi_an> rather then ...only thinking... | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:48 <cedk> cristi_an: stable version point to rc1 | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:48 <cristi_an> i am glad for them as i would for tryton as well | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:49 <cedk> cristi_an: there is no more community link | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:49 <cristi_an> ??? | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:49 <cristi_an> no link to foruim ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:49 <cristi_an> i noticed that !!!! | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:49 <cristi_an> that is because they want to be paid ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:50 <cristi_an> that will be indeed ugly !!!!!! | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:50 <cristi_an> very ugly !! | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:50 <cedk> and now they use also a google calendar :-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:51 <cristi_an> i hope they will make up their minds | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:51 <cristi_an> so no forum ???? | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:51 <cristi_an> forum gone ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:51 <cedk> cristi_an: the documentation page has not the same menu then others | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:52 <cristi_an> there is forum and comunity on | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:52 <yangoon1> it is under openobject | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:52 <cristi_an> pen object | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:52 <cristi_an> open object | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:52 <cristi_an> yes | ||
| 2009-02-06 16:52 <cristi_an> cu later guys | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:05 <cedk> I don't see how they will limit the number of users in sold editions | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:13 <carlos> Automatic migration NO | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:13 <carlos> that's why there is no migration script ;-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:13 <carlos> you need to buy such service | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:16 <nicoe> Yop, just to react, are they really gonna limit the maximum number of users ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:16 <carlos> cedk: it sounds more like a soft limit than a hard one | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:16 <carlos> what I don't really understand is the users vs accounts | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:16 <bechamel> maybe they will package the soft wihout source (and with their maintenance keys) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:17 <carlos> bechamel: it says they give the source code | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:17 <carlos> Our Open Source licence gives you the guarantee that you will always be able: to use the software without any restriction, whether it is in time or in number of users or modules. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:18 <bechamel> carlos: yes of course I answered to fast | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:18 <carlos> so I guess they just give you support for cases when you only have a number of users | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:18 <carlos> if you use more users or accounts than what you contracted, they will 'ask' you to move to the next package | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:19 <carlos> because the only way to use a hard limit there is with ondemand | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:19 <bechamel> carlos: yes | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:19 <carlos> and it doesn't look like an ondemand service, given that it's a fixed fee | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:20 <carlos> well, this new information explains many things happening in the 5.0 development cycle | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:21 <bechamel> I love how they justify the limitation of number of user: "With many users, maintenance is potentially difficult because we are then confronted with other problems like the rise in load." -> Ok but what about edition without limit ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:24 <carlos> well, if I understand it correctly, they only support installations with 15 active accounts | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:24 <carlos> at most | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:24 <nicoe> according to me account == a user in the database, a user == a real person. Maybe they think that more than one person can use the same account | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:24 <carlos> so if you have more than 15 users working at the same time, they don't cover you... | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:25 <carlos> nicoe: do you think so? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:26 <nicoe> carlos: That's how I understand "With not confusing with the number of users! The number of accounts is the number of people which can " logged" on Open ERP." | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:26 <carlos> hmm | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:26 <carlos> ok, I see it now | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:26 <carlos> however, I don't think they are assuming users will share accounts | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:26 <bechamel> the accounts on the user portal is for bug reporting/support | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:26 <nicoe> or is it the other way around ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:27 <carlos> but that not all people in the company will use OpenERP | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:27 <carlos> anyway, it seems to be a hiden way to impose license fees | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:27 <bechamel> it's this instance http://terp.tinyerp.com:8069/xmlrpc/ (took from the source) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:28 <fp> hello, just to react | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:28 <carlos> bechamel: I guess that makes sense | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:28 <fp> we don't limit users or impose licences fees at all | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:28 <bechamel> fp: hello, welcome on #tryton :) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:28 <fp> OpenERP is and has always been very open (unlike some comments I saw) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:29 <fp> The only think which is per user is the maintenance service offers | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:29 <fp> simply because biggest companies does not need the same SLA than small companies | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:29 <fp> that's why we have 3 maintenance propositions | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:30 <bechamel> fp: how will you enforce the number of user ? when the maintenance/support is made ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:30 <fp> for instance on the biggest maintenance proposition we guarantee 5 years of maintenance on stable version | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:30 <carlos> fp: yeah, we more or less got the idea, but is a bit confusing the mix between users and accounts | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:30 <fp> we don't restrict number of users | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:30 <carlos> fp: I think you should try to explain it a bit better so future customers get the idea | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:30 <bechamel> fp: so what does mean "Up to 15 users" ?? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:31 -!- igor__(n=igor@201.244.188.98) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:32 <fp> it's a contract | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:32 <fp> so if they have more user, we don't guarantee the service | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:32 <fp> we provide | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:33 -!- ikks_(n=igor@190.144.69.234) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:33 <bechamel> so is what carlos said before, to much user == no maitenance or edition upgrade | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:34 <carlos> which makes sense, just like per computer support contracts | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:35 <bechamel> /to/too/ | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:36 <cedk> as fixing seems just sending patches, I don't see the difficulty linked with number of users | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:38 <cedk> and by the way OpenERP (TinyERP) has not been always very open: closed repositories, closed plugins | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:38 <bechamel> .. restrictive licence for etiny | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:40 <carlos> bechamel: I thought etiny is GPL | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:41 <fp> cedk: we don't have closed plugins, they are opensource, we just have 2 plugins for shared funding | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:41 <fp> please stop crying everywhere openerp is not open this is not fair at all | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:41 <bechamel> carlos: no it was changed some time ago, you cannot remove the logo and the name from axelor and tiny sprl that appear on it | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:41 <fp> no | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:41 <fp> you must keep the openerp one | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:42 <fp> we provided a way to change the logo, you must just keep the openerp one | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:42 <cedk> fp: I only say, not in the past | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:42 <bechamel> fp: a way ? which one | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:43 <fp> you often had communication on this point to say openerp is not fully open | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:43 <cedk> fp: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenERP | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:43 <cedk> it is not only me | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <fp> yes, but you criticise Open ERP every week publicly | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <fp> I think it's not a good communication | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <fp> and not fair | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <panthera> i'm not so informed about all the stuff going behind; however, | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <fp> we do disagree on lots of technical points | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <panthera> as you probably know, i'm maintaining tinyerp in debian. and since 2005, | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:44 <fp> but we never criticied tryton (and I will manage so that we don't do it) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:45 <bechamel> fp: and by the way this licence (http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~openerp/openobject-server/trunk/annotate/head%3A/bin/report/pyPdf/pdf.py) ask you to reproduce it on the documentation, can you tell me where to find it ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:45 <panthera> all versions that were uploaded were completely free to debians understanding of free. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:45 <panthera> so i personally don't buy the 'openerp is not (fully) free' license wise. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:45 <fp> thanks. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:46 <fp> I just want to avoid people trying to pass this message | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:46 <cedk> panthera: we don't speak about free but OpenSource | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:46 <nicoe> panthera: I was wondering is the etiny case the same case as the firefox one ? Did you (or anyone from debian-legal) investigated this ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:46 <panthera> free, as debian understands/defines it, includes 'OpenSource'. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:46 <panthera> nicoe: not yet, etiny is still on my todo. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:47 <cedk> panthera: so better word can be community | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:48 <nicoe> nicoe: but the case with the logo is it the same problem that was there with firefox or is it completely different. At first I though it was the same but there seems to be a way to change the default behavior | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:48 <nicoe> So I may review my judgment about the "freeness" of this licence | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:50 <bechamel> from the licence "If you need commercial licence to remove this kind of restriction please contact us" | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:50 <bechamel> from http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~openerp/openobject-client-web/trunk/annotate/head%3A/doc/LICENSE.txt | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:51 <fp> So I continue to emphasize that tryton always try to criticise Open ERP. Both products are good, so why criticising each others. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:51 <fp> ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:51 <fp> I think it does not server the open source products | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:51 <fp> it's better to criticise proprietary software if you prefer | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:51 <fp> that's a real market | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:51 <fp> fighting each others will not server both products | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:52 <cedk> fp: it is you who see a fight | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:52 <cedk> and it is not because a product if open source that it is good | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:52 <fp> there is no fight because we don't reply. but you are often quite aggresive | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 -!- ikks_(n=igor@190.144.69.234) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 <fp> (and I remember you that you tried to pursue me on the tribunal :) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 <cedk> s/aggresive/critism/ | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 <cedk> fp: this is an other stuff and speak about that here | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 <cedk> s/speak/don't speak/ | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 <bechamel> fp: I don't understand you, you attacked cedric and me personnaly and now you came here to talk honey about open source ideal | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:53 <fp> really negative, and most of the time, I don't agree. | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:54 <cedk> negative != aggresive | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:54 <fp> I don't attack ? I just ask if we can be positive against both products ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:55 <carlos> fp: I think bechamel talks about another conversation, at least I don't read that as he's taking current conversation as an attack | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:55 <bechamel> fp: sorry but I don't trust you on this point, I'm not so stupid | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:56 <fp> I think the best we have to do is to promote our softwares and reuse parts of each others | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:56 <bechamel> fp: for me you only ask us to shut up, you don't care about fair open source collaboration | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:56 <cedk> fp: if you respect our copyright wich was not the case may times | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:57 <fp> critism will not help boths products (and if we reply to your criticts, this will become a fight) | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:57 <fp> adempiere was a catastroph on this point for both compiere and openbravo due to their communication | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:57 <bechamel> fp: we had to ask you a lot of times to put our copyright when tiny took our code, and you only change this when we put the copyright infigement page online | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:57 <fp> the 3 products lost a lot of credibility | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:57 <fp> I'd like to avoid this | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:58 <cedk> fp: I don'T agree critism is always a chance to re-evaluation your point of view, you must take it like a chance | ||
| 2009-02-06 17:59 -!- enlightx(n=enlightx@host-84-220-89-221.cust-adsl.tiscali.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:00 <fp> sorry, but lots of the critics are not fair. And, most of the time, you try to convince that openerp has a 'stupid' approach | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:01 <fp> We do not agree on lots of technical points, but we decided to not critics tryton but rather work and reuse your good points | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:01 <cedk> fp: and we have arguments and discuss how to implement it in a better way | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:01 <bechamel> why are you afraid of bad reputation? tiny is a so huge company with so huge customers , big dowloads, big user base, what harm a small project like tryton can do ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:01 <fp> If you don't want to do the same I understand, sorry for disturbing. | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:03 <cedk> we discuss to have better ways so of course we argument each other about the pro and the con | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:03 <cedk> so if you find it aggresive whe we say: this is not a good way because this and this | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:04 <cedk> we can not do anything for you | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:04 <cedk> we are always openned to discussion and we change our minds when somebody confinse us | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:05 <bechamel> fp: and I can tell you that our criticism are very soft IMHO, we could have been far more aggressive | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:05 <cedk> bechamel: no way, we talk only about code and features | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:07 <fp> Ok, bye. | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:07 <fp> See you may be at Fosdem | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:09 <cedk> and by the way the forum on openobject.com seems broken | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:10 <carlos> wow, I didn't know you had such huge conflict with fp | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:10 <nicoe> cedk: too late he's gone ... | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:10 <carlos> cedk: they are moving it from openerp.com to openobject.com so I guess something went wrong with the migration | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:11 <cedk> carlos: like often | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:11 <cedk> carlos: but fp will see this comment like an aggresive comment | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:11 <cedk> :-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:12 <cedk> nicoe: do you go finally to fosdem? | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:13 <Timitos> the also have a irc chatlog on openerp now: http://openobject.com/irc/ | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:13 <nicoe> Well as I said to bechamel yesterday : no it's my girlfriend's birthday on sunday | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:14 <cedk> Timitos: with irclog2html also :-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:14 <Timitos> cedk: yes | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:15 <cedk> Timitos: but I said to Tiny people that the code of conduct when you log irc is to display in the topic | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:15 <cedk> Timitos: but they don't care | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:15 <nicoe> cedk: so I wont be there ... but if you happen to see Fabien give him a KISS (not a kiss) from me ;) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:16 <Timitos> cedk: don´t understand what you mean, but i think it is not so important for me to understand this | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:16 <cedk> nicoe: what is the difference | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:16 <bechamel> nicoe: what's a KISS ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:16 <bechamel> Timitos: read the topic of the chan | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:16 <nicoe> cedk, bechamel : Keep It Simple Stupid | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:17 <nicoe> cedk, bechamel : it was just for the joke ... | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:17 <cedk> Timitos: I want to say that freenode people say if you log a chan, announce it in the topic of the chan | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:17 <Timitos> cedk: ah. now i understood. thx. | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:17 <nicoe> cedk, bechamel : anyway, if I ever go to brussels (maybe late on sunday) I'll give you a call | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:18 <cedk> Timitos: and by the way, when I ask if it will log the chan, they did not answer me | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:19 <bechamel> we forgot to ask fp how will be used the mysterious certificate number | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:19 <Timitos> cedk: when did you ask? perhaps they wanted to hold the info back until today | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:19 <nicoe> Anyway goodbye everyone ... have a nice weekend @FOSDEM | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:19 <cedk> Timitos: at the begining of the week | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:19 <Timitos> bechamel: you can ask him on #openobject perhaps? | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:20 <bechamel> Timitos: maybe it's too aggresive :) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:20 <Timitos> cedk: perhaps :-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:20 <cedk> Timitos: we already ask on openerp-fr, but they didn't want to answer | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:20 <cedk> Timitos: but it is our fault, we are to aggresif :-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:20 <carlos> bechamel: I think that number is to identify the modules that are 'certified' and thus supported | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:20 <carlos> but it's just a guess | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <bechamel> carlos: what prevent the customer to change it ? | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <cedk> carlos: yes, but the number seems to be randly generated | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <Timitos> cedk: i don´t mind about all that. we need to concentrate on tryton. this is my way of thinking | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <cedk> s/randly/randomly/ | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <carlos> bechamel: well, I see it more as an ID more than a secret key | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <carlos> cedk: ^^^ | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:21 <cedk> Timitos: I was just asking to see if it will be interesting for Tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:22 <carlos> just like the UUID numbers | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:22 <Timitos> cedk: i talked about the irc topic. i think you talked about the id topic now, didn´t you? | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:22 <cedk> carlos: but for that you have the version number of the module | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:22 <cedk> Timitos: yes | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:29 <carlos> cedk: no idea, I'm just guessing ;-) | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:30 <carlos> anyway, OpenERP is not using that field at all | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:31 <cedk> carlos: http://openerp.com/forum/topic8901.html?highlight=certificate | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:31 <cedk> carlos: there is the code to generate a certificate | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:34 <carlos> cedk: so it's just an ID for their new QA process | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:36 <cedk> carlos: don't know, it is a very strange and obscure things | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:36 <carlos> anyway, I don't think we need anything like that in Tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:37 <carlos> at least now | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:45 <cedk> carlos: for sure | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:46 <cedk> carlos: because we don't know what is the purpose of this | ||
| 2009-02-06 18:51 <carlos> cedk: well, from what I see (seems like it's really used in latest openerp trunk), it's a unique ID for the addons | ||
| 2009-02-06 19:05 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.120.133.194) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 19:28 -!- juanfer(n=juanfer@190.144.69.234) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 20:03 -!- paola(n=paola@host-84-223-76-210.cust-adsl.tiscali.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 20:09 <cristi_an> guys i just read the long discussion with fp | ||
| 2009-02-06 20:10 <cristi_an> i do no tknwo you ,but from what i see the guy is peacefully | ||
| 2009-02-06 20:20 <bechamel> cristi_an: he peacefully refused to answer our questions | ||
| 2009-02-06 20:33 -!- johbo(n=joh@statdsl-085-016-072-173.ewe-ip-backbone.de) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 21:03 <CIA-10> tryton: C?dric Krier <ced@b2ck.com> default * 1522:049d59b06328 trytond/trytond/model/ (modeldb.py modelstorage.py): Move _{update,rebuild}_tree from modelstorage to modeldb | ||
| 2009-02-06 21:24 -!- johbo_(n=joh@statdsl-085-016-072-173.ewe-ip-backbone.de) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 21:55 -!- enlightx(n=enlightx@host-84-220-89-221.cust-adsl.tiscali.it) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 21:55 -!- johbo(n=joh@statdsl-085-016-072-173.ewe-ip-backbone.de) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 22:06 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.120.134.97) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 22:13 -!- Gedd(n=ged@77.109.113.112) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 22:20 -!- vengfulsquirrel(n=ian@c-71-202-125-182.hsd1.ca.comcast.net) has joined #tryton | ||
| 2009-02-06 23:44 -!- ikks(i=igor@190.120.134.97) has joined #tryton |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!