CC Meeting Full 20081105
(07:53:12) #adempiere-team: modo (+ns ) por lem.freenode.net
(08:10:31) crooney [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:10:48) oscar [n=chatzill@p5B3BE705.dip.t-dialin.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:10:52) banym [n=banym@unaffiliated/banym] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:11:12) oscar: hello :-)
(08:11:22) banym: hi
(08:11:23) crooney: hi oscar
(08:11:24) banym: brb
(08:11:28) banym ha salido de la sala (quit: "Verlassend").
(08:11:41) banym [n=banym@unaffiliated/banym] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:11:42) oscar: hi colin, hi dominik
(08:11:56) oscar: hello Carlos
(08:12:15) CarlosRuiz: Hi all
(08:12:49) crooney: hi carlos
(08:13:27) crooney: some time yet .. right? I am looking to see if we have any moderator functionality in IRC Junior think there is
(08:15:46) trifon [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:18:58) wkana [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:19:38) crooney: I'm going to try switching on moderator mode just to see what happens
(08:20:06) crooney: can others type something in?
(08:20:35) oscar: what do you like ?
(08:20:55) crooney: ok so that doesn't work for me :)
(08:21:06) ***CarlosRuiz learning IRC
(08:21:43) crooney: is seems if we type /mode #channelname +m we can enable moderator mode
(08:21:50) Junior [n=Juni@unaffiliated/junior] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:21:54) ar_howard [n=AHoward@ppp118-208-77-224.lns1.bne4.internode.on.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:22:01) trifon: i expected to see more people today
(08:22:35) crooney: the a user can be given permission with /mode [#] +v [nick]
(08:22:53) trifon: user can be given permision to write?
(08:23:07) crooney: so it seems
(08:23:26) Junior: trifon, if the channel is set to +m only the @ and +v can "write"
(08:23:31) dgvr [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:23:47) crooney: but the operator must do it ... CarlosRuiz has a green light beside his name in my xchat does that mean he is the operator?
(08:24:01) Junior: so if CarlosRuiz does /mode #adempiere-team +m nothing that we write other can see
(08:24:06) Junior: because we don't have +v
(08:24:11) CarlosRuiz: /mode #adempiere-team +m
(08:24:17) CarlosRuiz: :-D
(08:24:30) trifon: i have one 1. have to go out in 16:15
(08:24:49) Junior: so the moderator can simply use /mode #adempiere-team +v Junior or /mode #adempiere-team -v Junior
(08:24:57) dgvr: Good afternoon gentlemen :)
(08:25:05) Junior: yellow dgvr :)
(08:25:07) crooney: I think you need two ## Carlos
(08:25:13) dgvr: yellow
(08:25:25) oscar: david the chines :-)
(08:25:34) oscar: david the chinese :-)
(08:25:36) crooney: hi dgvr
(08:27:07) CarlosRuiz: ok - can somebody write?
(08:27:07) dgvr: hey :)
(08:27:11) crooney: let me try
(08:27:14) crooney: :)
(08:27:18) crooney: hmm
(08:27:25) Junior: CarlosRuiz it can
(08:27:25) CarlosRuiz: hehehe - what's the /mode #adempiere-team +v ??
(08:27:41) CarlosRuiz: /mode #adempiere-team -v
(08:27:49) Junior: CarlosRuiz ...
(08:27:51) crooney: tha is how you give permissions to others to write
(08:28:01) Junior: CarlosRuiz do this
(08:28:08) Junior: /mode #adempiere-team Junior +o
(08:28:20) #adempiere-team: modo (+m ) por CarlosRuiz
(08:28:30) CarlosRuiz: ah - I see
(08:28:36) CarlosRuiz: you must keep quiet now :-D
(08:28:56) #adempiere-team: modo (+o crooney ) por CarlosRuiz
(08:28:56) crooney: yes it works!
(08:29:06) crooney: thank you
(08:29:22) #adempiere-team: modo (-m ) por CarlosRuiz
(08:29:42) crooney: I will not be moderator though because my connection can drop at any moment ... it's never very stable - so just in case
(08:30:05) trifon: there can be more than one moderator
(08:30:28) trifon: if one drop other remain.
(08:30:30) dgvr: There is normally only 1 moderator....a chairperson
(08:30:42) dgvr: But it may be a different person each time
(08:30:47) crooney: I think the operator is the moderator ... so there can be more than one operator
(08:30:50) Junior: that is why i've said to use #adempiere-team
(08:30:59) Junior: ##adempiere sorry
(08:31:12) Junior: if an op disconnects, this channel will remain with +m
(08:31:13) Junior: :)
(08:31:17) crooney: dgvr, yes procedurally but it may be technically possible!
(08:31:34) CarlosRuiz: who's going to be the moderator?
(08:31:49) crooney: Kai offered but said he might be late
(08:31:51) CarlosRuiz: btw - do you know how to change the subject of chat?
(08:32:01) crooney: Junior knows how it works maybe he will moderate??
(08:32:13) banym: CarlosRuiz, /topci
(08:32:16) banym: topic
(08:32:20) Junior: crooney, the problem is that i have to go for a while
(08:32:27) crooney: ok just a thought
(08:32:31) Junior: don't know if i miss 5 minutes or 50
(08:32:38) Junior: i don't want to create problems
(08:32:57) crooney: Junior, when the moderator has silenced everyone how do we indicate we wish to say something?
(08:32:57) Junior: if i come back in time, i will gladly help
(08:33:09) Junior: tell to the op
(08:33:14) Junior: in private
(08:33:39) Junior: and the op gives or "removes" the "voiced" flag (+v)
(08:33:41) crooney: ok so we "open a dialog" with operator?
(08:33:49) Junior: yep
(08:34:04) CarlosRuizemail@example.com: CarlosRuiz ha cambiado el tema a: Open Meeting (moderated) to discuss about Extension Policies - please join to #adempiere-moderator channel to raise hand
(08:34:49) CarlosRuiz: crooney - the idea is to raise hands in #adempiere-moderator channel
(08:35:45) crooney: ok - the open dialog with the moderator might be good too because then that channel is highlight for the moderator!?
(08:35:48) crooney: like
(08:36:43) banym: let's do it with adempire-moderator channel because you can see was first
(08:36:53) CarlosRuiz: /invite wkana #adempiere-moderator
(08:37:31) oscar: mmm
(08:38:13) crooney: ok so long as it's not too complex :)
(08:39:50) Junior: brb
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: proposed rules from Colin:
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 1.A moderator will be appointed. at the start of the meeting
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 2.The moderator will ensure a log of the IRC chat is maintained.
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 3.The moderator will define the topic(s) for discussion and set any scope limits it's felt might be needed to ensure the topic does not drift.
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 4.The moderator ask who wishes to make a statement.
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 5.In any order he chooses the moderator will identify people to “speak”.
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 6.As people “speak” others should refrain from interrupting.
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 7.When all who wish have “spoken” we can open for questions & comments.
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 8.To initiate asking a question request to speak in #adempiere-moderator
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 9.The moderator will identify the person to ask the next question (he will use the who enter @handle to do this!)
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 10.When typing the question or reply the use “...” at the end of your sentence to indicate you have more to add
(08:43:06) CarlosRuiz: 11.when someone is “speaking” please don't interrupt until no more “...” are appended.
(08:43:41) crooney: ok - I am updated to take account of the moderator usage
(08:45:03) karsten-thiemann [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:47:45) karsten-thiemann: test - should not work..
(08:48:26) crooney: ok when questions are being ask ... doing the v+ and -v might be a lot of hassle so what then?
(08:48:28) banym: si can see it ;-)
(08:49:47) crooney: so far I have for the rules ... not sure I will have tiome now to put them in the wiki but we can after for next time
(08:50:04) crooney: 1.A moderator will be appointed at the start of the meeting
(08:50:05) crooney: 2.The moderator will ensure a log of the IRC chat is maintained.
(08:50:05) crooney: 3.The moderator will assume “Channel Operator” status and set the chanenel mode to “Moderated” using the command /mode #adempiere-team +m
(08:50:05) crooney: In “moderated” mode only those who have been given “Voice” by the operator may send messages.
(08:50:05) crooney: 4.The moderator will define the topic(s) for discussion and set any scope limits it's felt might be needed to ensure the topic does not drift.
(08:50:10) crooney: 5.The moderator ask who wishes to make a statement.
(08:50:12) crooney: 6.Those wishing to speak should indicate so in the #adempiere-moderated channel
(08:50:14) crooney: 7.In any order he chooses the moderator will identify people to “speak” and provide them the Voice using the commands /mode #adempiere-team +v or -v [nick]
(08:50:17) crooney: 8.After all those wishing to make a statement have spoken we can open for questions.
(08:50:19) crooney: so how do we handle questions?
(08:50:47) crooney: just open it up as per usual or someone asks to a person and just those two are opened to speak?
(08:53:38) banym: crooney, i think we don't need voice add and remove if its neccesary we can do it, but test it without. Moderator just have to say who is allowed to talk. that's easier.
(08:55:29) crooney: ok so stick to the original rules I posted?
(08:56:51) hengsin [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(08:57:13) banym: k
(09:00:05) CarlosRuiz: time to go?
(09:01:18) CarlosRuiz: better - time to start?
(09:01:31) crooney: well it's 14:00 ok ... but there are many not hear you would expect ... shall we give then 5-10 mins?
(09:01:52) banym: yes 5min. should be o.k
(09:02:42) mark_o_ [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:02:51) mark_o_: good afternoon all
(09:03:01) dladwig [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:03:06) wkana: hi mark
(09:03:19) CarlosRuiz: Hi Mark and Donald
(09:03:20) Fred___ [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:03:21) Kai_ [n=Kai7@port-87-193-237-134.static.qsc.de] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:03:26) hengsin: hi fred
(09:03:37) CarlosRuiz: Hi Fred and Kai, nice to see you here :-)
(09:03:51) Fred___: Hi Hengsin, Carlos, Kai !
(09:04:03) Fred___: Donald, Trifon also
(09:04:12) Kai_: Hi Carlos Fred___
(09:04:14) Fred___: Hi All :)
(09:04:35) dladwig: Hi All
(09:04:37) jsSolutions [n=jsSoluti@ip72-197-81-229.sd.sd.cox.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:04:42) crooney: Kai_ I never managed to get the rules in the wiki because there was a suggestion to use the moderator functionality of IRC
(09:04:43) hengsin: Junior = Carlos Junior ?
(09:04:48) Bahman [n=Bahman@126.96.36.199] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:04:51) Bahman ha salido de la sala (quit: Remote closed the connection).
(09:04:56) crooney: and we were experimenting with that proposal
(09:05:01) muthah [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:05:06) Bahman [n=Bahman@188.8.131.52] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:05:33) Kai_: crooney : if there is such a functionality it's better of course
(09:05:47) Kai_: I am really not an IRC crack. :-)
(09:06:10) Bahman: red1 told he'll be back in 40 mins...So I think we're good to go.
(09:06:16) CarlosRuiz: ok - 2:06 GMT
(09:06:18) crooney: well me neither
(09:07:41) Kai_: Should we set the topic more precise?
(09:07:45) crooney: ok not everyone here is also in the new #adempiere-moderator channel
(09:07:58) crooney: the idea was
(09:08:14) crooney: 1.A moderator will be appointed at the start of the meeting
(09:08:16) crooney: 2.The moderator will ensure a log of the IRC chat is maintained.
(09:08:16) crooney: 3.The moderator will assume “Channel Operator” status and set the chanenel mode to “Moderated” using the command /mode #adempiere-team +m
(09:08:16) crooney: In “moderated” mode only those who have been given “Voice” by the operator may send messages.
(09:08:16) crooney: 4.The moderator will define the topic(s) for discussion and set any scope limits it's felt might be needed to ensure the topic does not drift.
(09:08:18) crooney: 5.The moderator ask who wishes to make a statement.
(09:08:20) crooney: 6.Those wishing to speak should indicate so in the #adempiere-moderated channel
(09:08:22) crooney: 7.In any order he chooses the moderator will identify people to “speak” and provide them the Voice using the commands /mode #adempiere-team +v or -v [nick]
(09:08:25) crooney: 8.After all those wishing to make a statement have spoken the moderator can open for questions to all using the command /mode #adempiere-team +v
(09:08:28) crooney: 9.When typing the question or reply the use “...” at the end of your sentence to indicate you have more to add
(09:08:30) crooney: 10.when someone is “speaking” please don't interrupt until no more “...” are appended.
(09:08:33) #adempiere-team: modo (+o Kai_ ) por CarlosRuiz
(09:08:52) crooney: and hey this is a first attempt so please have patience :)
(09:09:26) jsSolutions: what is the character to use at the end to the sentence?
(09:09:40) crooney: the ...?
(09:09:57) crooney: I just thought that would a easy way for people to indicate...
(09:10:04) crooney: that they had more to add...
(09:10:14) jsSolutions: using a '?'
(09:10:18) crooney: to hopefully stop other interrupting
(09:10:35) banym: ;-) just use a "." for end of each post
(09:10:38) crooney: no :) sorry I mean the "..." characters?
(09:11:16) jsSolutions: ah- ok
(09:11:32) nanox [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:11:36) banym: no more to say...
(09:11:38) banym: make a.
(09:11:54) crooney: ok well I think we are ready?
(09:12:09) Kai_: Am I the moderator now? (Sorry, just to make sure... :-) )
(09:12:15) crooney: Kai_ will act as moderator?
(09:12:35) Kai_: OK, I will do my very best: No experince but talented. :-)
(09:12:50) #adempiere-team: modo (+m ) por Kai_
(09:13:04) #adempiere-team: modo (+v CarlosRuiz ) por Kai_
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: OK - I have some ideas to start - maybe trying to answer these questions can help:
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: - what is an extension?
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: - do we want to encourage extensions? or do we want everything goes to core?
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: - if we would want to encourage extensions - what must be the proper way on Adempiere?
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: - what must be the behavior (open source behavior I suppose) of extensions?
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: - what about trademarks in extensions? conditions? risk management?
(09:13:17) CarlosRuiz: I think we can try to discuss one at a time - to get first the fundamental, and then go deep in the details.
(09:13:58) CarlosRuiz: does somebody wants to try defining the first?
(09:14:27) #adempiere-team: modo (+v Fred___ ) por Kai_
(09:14:47) Fred___: My definition of extension would be: Something that is built on top
(09:14:52) Fred___: and does not modify the core
(09:15:02) Fred___: am done
(09:15:45) Kai_: No one raised hands... :-)
(09:15:57) #adempiere-team: modo (+v karsten-thiemann ) por Kai_
(09:16:21) karsten-thiemann: the problem I see with this definition is that we don't have a really extension friendly core
(09:16:51) karsten-thiemann: sometimes you need to change/enhance the core to build new funcitionality
(09:16:55) karsten-thiemann: .
(09:17:02) #adempiere-team: modo (+v Bahman ) por Kai_
(09:17:16) Bahman: Just wanted to say as karsten-thiemann did...
(09:17:28) Bahman: IMO, extension is a vertical...
(09:17:44) Bahman: which uses services from lower levels...
(09:18:07) Bahman: While we can't define levels or services that core can provide to verticals...
(09:18:18) Bahman: we have difficulty defining extensions...
(09:18:28) Bahman: A clear expample is POStertia...
(09:18:34) Bahman: While POS is a vertical in nature...
(09:18:43) Bahman: they made modifications to core....
(09:18:46) Bahman: Over.
(09:19:03) Kai_: Sorry: But I would like to change something
(09:19:19) Kai_: I will open the channel for all now. We keep it with the "raising"
(09:19:29) Kai_: But I just post the name who is next
(09:19:39) Kai_: This is easier for me. ;-)
(09:20:04) CarlosRuiz: you rule
(09:20:12) Kai_: Yeah...
(09:20:28) karsten-thiemann: hmm - and who is next?
(09:20:39) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(09:20:48) CarlosRuiz: I like definition from Fred - I just suppose that we have a big problem in Adempiere - as core is mixed kernel + business functionality
(09:20:48) CarlosRuiz: So, I would think to define core as the kernel - and extension must just add business functionality without touching kernel
(09:20:48) CarlosRuiz: Meanwhile we don't have a clear separation between kernel and business - we can have a defined separation.
(09:20:48) CarlosRuiz: Extensions must not change kernel - that must be changed in adempiere core.
(09:20:48) CarlosRuiz: Extensions could add business functionality using extension ModelValidator, etc.
(09:20:48) CarlosRuiz: We'll find many points where Adempiere is not friendly extensions - but at least the light-definition can help us to look and improve those points.
(09:21:05) CarlosRuiz: .
(09:21:26) Kai_: crooney
(09:21:52) crooney: what puzzled me about the idea of extension in an open source world was...
(09:22:03) crooney: it seem to be as a module...
(09:22:37) crooney: in the close source world you pay for each module but in the open source world what does it matter if all is included or not
(09:22:39) crooney: .
(09:22:54) Kai_: ar_howard
(09:23:55) #adempiere-team: modo (+v ar_howard ) por Kai_
(09:23:59) ar_howard: Question - do people think core = code, or code + dictionary - are we all thinking the same thing?
(09:24:04) #adempiere-team: modo (+v banym ) por Kai_
(09:24:11) #adempiere-team: modo (+v dgvr ) por Kai_
(09:24:15) #adempiere-team: modo (+v dladwig ) por Kai_
(09:24:19) #adempiere-team: modo (+v hengsin ) por Kai_
(09:24:27) #adempiere-team: modo (+v jsSolutions ) por Kai_
(09:24:30) #adempiere-team: modo (+v Junior ) por Kai_
(09:24:46) ar_howard: .
(09:25:08) Kai_: OK, another change (we are still trying...)
(09:25:43) Kai_: If someone wants to answer directly to a post, he should wirte just a "!" in this channel
(09:25:51) Kai_: OK?
(09:25:55) dgvr: ok
(09:26:14) Kai_: So then CarlosRuiz for crooney
(09:26:24) CarlosRuiz: Colin - about "what does it matter if all is included or not"
(09:26:24) CarlosRuiz: I think allowing extensions is a way to bring competence - people will compete for the best POS - people will compete for the best subscription-add-on-module, etc.
(09:26:24) CarlosRuiz: Allan - yes - "code + dictionary" - there is a difference between a dictionary table and a business table - same as in code
(09:26:30) #adempiere-team: modo (-m ) por Kai_
(09:26:45) CarlosRuiz: .
(09:27:21) Kai_: hengsin
(09:28:10) mark_o_: should be joel now?
(09:28:12) hengsin: I like fred definition, i.e build on top and not changing core.
(09:29:03) hengsin: yeap, sometime an extension might replace some code in core but that is usually just a problem in the core rather than changing the definition of an extension
(09:29:04) hengsin: .
(09:29:17) Kai_: banym
(09:29:56) banym: what is when new modul needs new core functionality should this go into core or should it be maintained with the modul?
(09:29:57) banym: .
(09:30:03) CarlosRuiz: !
(09:30:19) Kai_: jsSolutions (sorry Carlos!)
(09:30:53) jsSolutions: it's ok, let CR answer dircetly- mine is a separate issue related to Colin post
(09:31:03) Kai_: OK, so CarlosRuiz
(09:31:05) CarlosRuiz: banym - it should go into core IMHO - extensions changing core (kernel-not-business) in some way are forking
(09:31:31) CarlosRuiz: .
(09:31:33) Bahman: !
(09:31:38) Kai_: Bahman
(09:31:57) Bahman: Wondering what is the exact definition of kernel...
(09:32:10) CarlosRuiz: !
(09:32:14) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(09:32:20) Bahman: Perhaps it'd be good if we first define clearly what is kernel.
(09:32:36) CarlosRuiz: good point Bahman, I would define it as common functionalities, like PO, like window management, etc - none related to business rules ...
(09:32:42) hengsin: !
(09:32:50) CarlosRuiz: business rules in adempiere are mostly related to three modules: inventory, AR/AP, accounting
(09:32:55) CarlosRuiz: .
(09:32:58) Kai_: hengsin
(09:34:08) hengsin: in practise, we can choose to build anything as an extension or directly into core. the tradeoff is a matter of flexibility ( possibility of replacing the entire implementation ) vs optimize integration
(09:34:09) hengsin: .
(09:34:41) Kai_: OK, Joel you had been a victim somehow. Now your turn.
(09:34:50) jsSolutions: thanks Kai!
(09:34:52) jsSolutions: Colin- about "what does it matter if all is included or not"- there are at least 4 POS extensions right now. I don't think we can or should put them all in the trunk. User should have their choice to preference
(09:35:03) Muthah_cell [n=Muthah@184.108.40.206] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:35:18) crooney: !
(09:35:44) banym: !
(09:36:14) Kai_: jsSolutions: done?
(09:36:22) jsSolutions: oh sorry .
(09:36:26) dgvr: !
(09:36:27) Kai_: crooney
(09:36:30) crooney: :)
(09:36:42) crooney: Joel, yes but they have the choice!
(09:36:57) crooney: all 4 exist together
(09:37:28) crooney: now I know that could mean extra code = extra potential bugs but they have the choice now
(09:37:33) hengsin: !
(09:37:37) Fred___: !
(09:37:42) crooney: also if I can answer Carlos response from earlier
(09:37:49) crooney: well I guess it is somewhat colored by the meaning of open source too
(09:38:02) crooney: for me it's about making software solutions about services. .. implementation, support development training
(09:38:02) crooney: but your proposal sounds like creating a market for modules ... so we are back to software be a product
(09:38:10) crooney: so for me this is a fundamental
(09:38:11) crooney: .
(09:38:17) Kai_: banym
(09:39:01) CarlosRuiz: ! for Colin
(09:39:09) jsSolutions: !
(09:39:44) banym: jsSolutions, as modules i see no problem for 4 pos next to each other. i core i agree tha'ts not maintainable for long time. but some times community needs to say what is the solution "WE" want to use an maintain if there is no "usergroup"
(09:39:50) banym: .
(09:39:59) Kai_: dgvr
(09:40:14) dgvr: re the definition of "core"
(09:40:17) dgvr: ...
(09:40:25) dgvr: wouldn't the "core" be anything that is common to all implementations of the application
(09:40:26) Kai_: hengsin
(09:40:45) PCGoneLetter [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:41:06) hengsin: having 4 pos in the core is not practical, the amount of potential conflict will be unmanageable
(09:41:08) hengsin: .
(09:41:19) Kai_: Fred___
(09:41:31) Fred___: I agree with Hengsin
(09:41:46) Fred___: Also to carlos point, sometime
(09:41:48) Fred___: we add new functionality
(09:41:52) Fred___: that is essentail for us
(09:42:00) Fred___: but I think is not needed at all for ERP features
(09:42:08) Fred___: the main incompatibility with Posterita and Adempiere
(09:42:12) Fred___: resides in the database
(09:42:21) Fred___: we add some fields like pin
(09:42:25) Fred___: terminal autolock
(09:42:30) mark_o_: !
(09:42:31) Fred___: money refunded
(09:42:42) Fred___: so I don't know if these should be included or not into core
(09:42:49) Fred___: and from a practical point of view
(09:43:04) Fred___: we will have to get approval for each new addition we think is needed for us
(09:43:06) Fred___: .
(09:43:18) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(09:43:34) CarlosRuiz: Colin, "so we are back to software be a product"
(09:43:34) CarlosRuiz: not necessarily - in ubuntu you can install sun-java, gcj, etc.
(09:43:34) CarlosRuiz: even you can install both at the same time and point which one do you want to use at some moment (obviouly we're far from that in adempiere) - but you see sun-java and gcj are open source, not necessarily products
(09:43:34) CarlosRuiz: That's what I mean about competence - not necessarily supporting commercial products
(09:43:34) CarlosRuiz: I also agree with Heng Sin about having 4 POS will bring us conflicts - and misunderstandings
(09:43:34) CarlosRuiz: Fred, I agree, it's different to add a PIN to C_BPartner, than adding something to AD_Window
(09:43:48) red1 [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(09:43:51) CarlosRuiz: .
(09:44:07) Kai_: jsSolutions
(09:44:19) jsSolutions: same thoughts.
(09:45:34) Kai_: We should define a timeout. :-)
(09:45:48) crooney: does mark_o wish to say something?
(09:45:53) mark_o_: yepp ;-)
(09:46:02) Kai_: Yes, but I am not sure if Joel is done.
(09:46:08) Kai_: OK, mark_o_
(09:46:12) mark_o_: thanx
(09:46:13) mark_o_: The view of an ADempiere Implementor Company.
(09:46:13) mark_o_: An extension should allow to develop business logic without
(09:46:14) mark_o_: to ba afraid, to get stopped before getting it into Core/ kernel.
(09:46:14) jsSolutions: yep, put my period .
(09:46:19) mark_o_: It should be maintainable completly encapsulated from core.
(09:46:31) mark_o_: we have release early, release often ...
(09:46:52) mark_o_: but it's sometimes not practicable to develop like this ...
(09:47:12) mark_o_: ant we always spend alot of time thinking about doing things generic ...
(09:47:31) mark_o_: even if we try to develop localizations ...
(09:47:57) mark_o_: encapsulation from core would allow to have less dependencies
(09:48:00) mark_o_: .
(09:48:10) crooney: !
(09:48:25) Kai_: OK, now Bahman wants to say something off topic...
(09:48:35) Bahman: Sorry but house owner is at the door willing to negotiate the new rent amount...
(09:48:35) Bahman: What choice do I have?! :-)
(09:48:35) Bahman: I have to leave but will read the logs.
(09:48:35) Bahman: Over.
(09:48:59) Kai_: OK, crooney
(09:49:12) dgvr: !
(09:49:20) crooney: @ Bahman - Definition of kernel
(09:49:27) crooney: I've said before but will repeat. The power in adempiere is the business functionality not the framework. The framework has made us stuck with 90s client server design & struggling to support more than 2 Dbs
(09:49:49) crooney: if we had a real plugin architecture this might be a different discussion!
(09:49:51) crooney: and
(09:49:56) crooney: @ Fred
(09:50:00) crooney: >we will have to get approval for each new addition
(09:50:01) crooney: Why? You do not need to now?
(09:50:01) crooney: In your case I don't believe the intention is to develop along side your work but was simply to make it easy for those (and I have seen quiet a few) that wanted to try posterita with adempiere but could not manage the technical aspects of doing tha
(09:50:09) mark_o_: !
(09:50:10) crooney: that
(09:50:15) CarlosRuiz: !
(09:50:25) crooney: I would have thought was trifon did was beneficial!?
(09:50:27) crooney: .
(09:50:45) Kai_: dgvr
(09:50:48) dgvr: Having multiple competing extensions within AD can lead to "healthy" competition...and a stronger AD overall if the extension survives...
(09:50:50) dgvr: if someone is motivated enought to do so...then why not..and then its open to peer review...
(09:51:09) dgvr: an equally important point is "what type of companies we like here, what type of open-source behavior we expect here"
(09:51:27) muthah ha salido de la sala (quit: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).
(09:51:51) jsSolutions: !
(09:53:15) Kai_: Please everyone, don't forget your "." line
(09:53:22) dgvr: aha
(09:53:30) dgvr: my apologies
(09:53:32) dgvr: .
(09:53:42) Kai_: mark_o_
(09:53:52) mark_o_: @colin. Why not framework as kernel? For example, we have made
(09:53:52) mark_o_: a complete refactoring of InOutGenerate withr further Enhancements
(09:53:52) mark_o_: for out Customers here in Germany. We would like
(09:53:52) mark_o_: to suggest it for trunk/core, but we cannot ber sure that the Community
(09:53:52) mark_o_: in other parts of the world would want to have it. I believe
(09:53:53) mark_o_: InOutGenerate would be part of core in your mind
(09:53:57) mark_o_: ...
(09:54:12) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(09:54:16) CarlosRuiz: Fred said ">we will have to get approval for each new addition"
(09:54:16) CarlosRuiz: Colin said "Why? You do not need to now?"
(09:54:16) CarlosRuiz: I would say -> Yes, it's needed.
(09:54:16) CarlosRuiz: What if Posterita POS adds C_BPartner.PIN, and openxpertya POS adds C_BPartner.CashKEY - meaning the same thing.
(09:54:16) CarlosRuiz: That's a big problem we'll have integrating everything - duplicated fields and tables, I suppose it will raise duplicated code also, etc.
(09:54:16) CarlosRuiz: What I suppose is (as normal in open source) from time to time an extension is so brilliant over the rest of competence - that maybe will be wanted to bring into core. We can set up a proper process to do that also.
(09:54:16) mark_o_: if InOutGenerate could be prt of an extension ...
(09:54:36) CarlosRuiz: .
(09:54:52) CarlosRuiz: sorry - I didn't notice mark hasn't finished :-(
(09:55:02) mark_o_: no prob ;-)
(09:55:08) dgvr: !
(09:55:18) Kai_: jsSolutions
(09:55:35) jsSolutions: same as CR again :)
(09:55:37) jsSolutions: >we will have to get approval for each new addition If there are four competing POS in the core, each might implement PIN differently. That becomes almost impossible for the user to configure. It's not as much a problem if the extensions are independent. But a big problem if they are all merged into trunk
(09:55:45) jsSolutions: .
(09:55:52) Kai_: Fred___
(09:55:54) mark_o_: !
(09:56:06) Fred___: No we don't need to ask for permission, we just add it in our little posterita project. :)
(09:56:08) Fred___: As I said even some of the database modification we do internally,
(09:56:09) Fred___: we are not agreeing with ourselves.
(09:56:11) Fred___: How many columns will we add in Adempiere tables?
(09:56:12) Fred___: I never said what trifon did was bad. In fact it's great and it is welcomed. It's more a matter of technicality. But you will have to consider of what's going to happen in the future. A lot of issues will be arise not now, but later.
(09:56:16) Fred___: Those who are having problems, are those using Adempiere, then are trying to add posterita. If they just use our Posterita.zip they don't have any problems.
(09:56:21) Fred___: If people want to use Posterita they can just download directly from our project. Unfortunately we don't have something easy right now to migrate their data, that's because we didn't invest in it. But it's not hard technically. Because we are doing that already, and everything is done with a fresh Adempiere.
(09:56:39) Fred___: for now .
(09:56:43) Fred___: I need to read
(09:56:45) Fred___: .
(09:56:52) Kai_: dgvr
(09:56:57) dgvr: Just put major decisions about whether something is core or otherwise to an open vote of users...they'll tell you soon enough whether its required core or not
(09:56:59) dgvr: .
(09:57:11) Kai_: mark_o_
(09:57:24) mark_o_: @Carlos You hit the point. One could provide an extension, easily
(09:57:24) mark_o_: to check and integrate...
(09:57:46) mark_o_: And maybe goood enough to get into core sometime? No fear of revert.
(09:57:49) mark_o_: .
(09:58:16) Kai_: OK then ar_howard
(09:58:20) ar_howard: As an end-user it is easier to turn functionality off and have 1 best practice soln than to try and import additional modules - too much time wasted picking "the right" think to addin - isn't it better that everyone contribute to 1 best practice solution?
(09:58:25) ar_howard: .
(09:58:36) jsSolutions: !
(09:58:43) Kai_: jsSolutions
(09:58:55) dgvr: !
(09:59:02) jsSolutions: that would be nice- but as you get up the stack of features, it's not realistic
(09:59:11) CarlosRuiz: !
(09:59:24) jsSolutions: posterita POS and OB POS are tailored for very different scenarios
(09:59:37) jsSolutions: and personal preference weighs in
(09:59:55) jsSolutions: it's not so much an issue at the accounting level- there you can have a best practice
(10:00:07) jsSolutions: but POS level is very preferential
(10:00:08) jsSolutions: .
(10:00:16) Kai_: dgvr
(10:00:20) dgvr: @ar_howard: Agreed default functionality with other extensions optional....but still potentially available
(10:00:40) dgvr: .
(10:00:42) dgvr: soz
(10:00:46) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:00:49) CarlosRuiz: as Mark pointed rules to add business things in Adempiere are (and I think MUST BE) strict.
(10:00:49) CarlosRuiz: extension developers must have a playground where they can develop without asking too much about permissions - following some recommendations to allow easy integration
(10:01:00) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:01:14) Kai_: hengsin
(10:02:23) hengsin: I'm not sure a strict definition is good here, I'm pro that we are more open and provide ample room for innovations instead
(10:02:25) hengsin: .
(10:02:34) Kai_: Fred___
(10:02:49) Fred___: Our playground is the Posterita project now. We are happy there.
(10:02:51) Fred___: You will notice how fast we started changing things the day we moved outside of Adempiere. That's because prior to that, we tried to build everything with only core functionality, and tried not to modify a single piece of code.
(10:03:23) Fred___: Note that every core code, we modify from Adempiere is easily identified. Because we intend to stay in synch with Adempiere.
(10:03:24) hengsin: !
(10:03:24) Fred___: Note very important we did not, and will not rebrand Adempiere.
(10:03:26) Fred___: .
(10:03:45) Kai_: hengsin
(10:04:33) hengsin: fred, just want to point out that's not the right way when you build things together with core. if you are staying close then it is a different game
(10:04:35) hengsin: .
(10:04:53) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:04:57) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:05:20) CarlosRuiz: well - I suppose we had some flaws managing POsterita relations
(10:05:25) CarlosRuiz: but we can learn and adapt
(10:05:39) CarlosRuiz: they could be close even opening own project in sourceforge
(10:05:52) CarlosRuiz: it's time to try again to get them close :-)
(10:05:53) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:05:53) crooney: !
(10:06:13) Kai_: Fred___
(10:06:34) Fred___: hengsin, what do you mean right way ethically or technically?
(10:07:01) hengsin: !
(10:07:07) Fred___: .
(10:07:12) Kai_: crooney
(10:07:55) crooney: ok this is NOT aimed at Fred but I am playing devil advocate
(10:07:59) crooney: but
(10:08:04) crooney: I also see a different between an extension in our repository such as Carlos' localisation and one outside .. because we here allow all to make changes but another project might not and might like JJ did try to keep control my restricting access to only themselves
(10:08:22) crooney: .
(10:08:25) Kai_: hengsin
(10:09:00) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:09:10) hengsin: Fred, I means technically when you are working close to the kernel, then the mode of working is different. think a kernel linux driver vs a user space driver.
(10:09:12) hengsin: .
(10:09:26) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:09:38) CarlosRuiz: Colin, yes - there's a difference. What I say is someway is a flaw from Adempiere - they needed to open different project because we don't have clear policies.
(10:09:54) CarlosRuiz: Maybe with clear policies they could return - or we can have clear policies even for them out of our svn repository.
(10:09:56) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:10:03) crooney: !
(10:10:06) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:10:12) Kai_: Sorry crooney
(10:10:55) hengsin: !
(10:11:03) Kai_: crooney your turn
(10:11:13) crooney: ok I really wasn't speaking of posterita .. but if we have extensions do we include extension from other project that do not allow access? as we saw with compiere a GPL is not everything!
(10:11:26) crooney: .
(10:11:36) Kai_: hengsin
(10:11:43) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:11:45) ar_howard ha salido de la sala.
(10:12:01) jmpiloq [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:13:03) hengsin: carlos, I think we should be more open here, not everyone must do their things in Adempiere svn, people can have choice and it is then up to the user and others to decide whether to use that
(10:13:05) hengsin: .
(10:13:09) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:13:29) dgvr: !
(10:13:36) CarlosRuiz: Colin/Heng Sin - being on svn repository or not is a matter of the next question
(10:13:37) CarlosRuiz: - what must be the behavior (open source behavior I suppose) of extensions?
(10:13:52) CarlosRuiz: so - if we think it's enough about defining extensino
(10:13:54) Fred___: !
(10:13:55) CarlosRuiz: extension
(10:13:59) CarlosRuiz: we could go for next topics
(10:14:01) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:14:04) jsSolutions: !
(10:14:15) Kai_: dgvr
(10:14:18) dgvr: There seems to be some anxiety about an extension growing legs and becoming independent. Is that correct?
(10:14:27) dgvr: Are we including in the defining an "extension" the capaciy to be a potentially independent product? If so, then thats way out of my understanding of an "extension".
(10:14:42) dgvr: A seperate compenent, even justifisying its own project, that dovetails into the "core" is what I understand as an "extension".
(10:14:44) dgvr: .
(10:14:51) Kai_: Fred___
(10:15:08) Fred___: Fist of all we want to be friendly with Adempiere
(10:15:14) Fred___: Hengsin, Ok yes we probably have a lot of flaws. I agree our main priority right now is to get something working. and not really to get it working perfectly with Adempiere. Just a priority thing. Not saying that this is not important.
(10:15:21) PCGoneLetter ahora se llama PCWorkLetter
(10:15:34) Fred___: What is important for us
(10:15:49) Fred___: is to know what is it that is tolerated by Adempiere
(10:15:55) Fred___: and which is not
(10:16:07) Fred___: The biggest issue for us
(10:16:14) Fred___: has always been trademark
(10:16:20) Fred___: we have no issue in opening up our svn
(10:16:25) Fred___: no issue with rebranding
(10:16:31) Fred___: no issue with acknowledging people work
(10:16:37) Fred___: even with fork for a matter of fact
(10:16:51) Fred___: no issue with copyright
(10:17:27) Fred___: if you can propose something that works for us
(10:17:35) Fred___: we are for getting closer
(10:17:45) Fred___: but getting closer does not necessarily mean same repository
(10:17:48) Fred___: I agree with hengsin
(10:17:50) Fred___: .
(10:17:53) Kai_: jsSolutions
(10:18:04) jsSolutions: it's naive to think we can define behavior of extensions. if someone wants to make a close source extension, they can, and if someone wants to use it they can. People must choose the open-source community approach on it's own merit- better quality code and features if many adopt it.
(10:18:20) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:18:28) jsSolutions: it's just an exercise in futility to try to combat those that want another way
(10:18:29) jsSolutions: .
(10:18:33) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:19:02) CarlosRuiz: Joel, we can't define the behavior - but we can define the EXPECTED behavior to be considered as a friendly adempiere extension
(10:19:10) CarlosRuiz: something like "certified" extension
(10:19:20) CarlosRuiz: if it accomplish some policies from us - we could "certify" it
(10:19:41) CarlosRuiz: and as Fred pointed - I think we need clear policies
(10:19:48) CarlosRuiz: and hopefully "stable" policies
(10:19:52) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:19:57) banym: !
(10:20:05) Kai_: banym
(10:20:43) banym: and all don't want to work close to adempiere? they are just not "certified"?
(10:20:43) banym: .
(10:21:01) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:21:06) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:21:24) CarlosRuiz: yes - I suppose proprietary extensions won't be "certified" to follow the recommended policies from Adempiere project
(10:21:40) banym: !
(10:21:42) CarlosRuiz: extensions hiding sources - etc - but that must be a matter of the next questions - if we can agree first on the first one
(10:21:45) Fred___: !
(10:21:51) CarlosRuiz: do we have enough about what an extension is?
(10:21:56) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:22:03) Kai_: banym
(10:22:13) dgvr: !
(10:22:51) banym: so i want to write a extension and what is my benefit to be certified. do my users get help in adempiere forum if extension is not working. becaues if there is no benefit and a lot of work nobody will "certifie" his extension that's what i think.
(10:22:51) banym: .
(10:23:19) Kai_: Fred___
(10:23:26) Fred___: Carlos, What is a proprietary extension?
(10:23:33) trifon_ [firstname.lastname@example.org] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:23:38) Fred___: and what I think
(10:23:42) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:23:56) Fred___: what would be of greatest value for us
(10:24:02) Fred___: if we are 'certify'
(10:24:16) Fred___: is to have our Adempiere+Posterita release under Adempiere downloads
(10:24:26) Fred___: at the end of the day
(10:24:36) Fred___: we are looking for eye balls
(10:24:38) Fred___: :)
(10:24:39) Fred___: .
(10:24:45) Kai_: dgvr
(10:24:50) dgvr: You can't stop someone creating a closed source extension or closed source anything but you can stop supporting them as an open-source community.
(10:24:52) hengsin: !
(10:24:58) dgvr: Freeze them out of all community driven open source resources and discussions as they've elected to do to the community.
(10:25:05) dgvr: This is a community driven business- not a charity for private investors
(10:25:06) dgvr: .
(10:25:17) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:25:33) CarlosRuiz: good point Fred - it can answer banym about the benefit of being certified
(10:25:46) CarlosRuiz: we could think on creating distro's - with certified extensions
(10:25:47) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:25:56) Kai_: hengsin
(10:26:28) hengsin: fred, it is all there for your to provide that, I don't think we have ever say we don't want that
(10:26:32) hengsin: .
(10:26:56) Fred___: !
(10:27:00) Kai_: Fred___
(10:27:26) Fred___: yes I never said you did not allow us
(10:27:33) Fred___: however our overall feeling was that
(10:27:36) Bahman ha salido de la sala (quit: Read error: 113 (No route to host)).
(10:27:38) banym: !
(10:27:39) Fred___: brand are not welcomed :(
(10:27:40) Bahman [n=Bahman@220.127.116.11] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:27:50) crooney: !
(10:27:50) Fred___: we have a hard time to imagine us having a living without a brand
(10:28:10) Fred___: .
(10:28:16) Kai_: banym
(10:29:37) banym: different distributions is not a good idea in my opinion. creating a nice install wizard where you can choose 'certified' extensions would be more nice. there you can also add some informations.
(10:29:38) banym: .
(10:29:49) Kai_: crooney
(10:29:59) dgvr: !
(10:30:03) crooney: well I didn't think we would discuss specific but since it was raised...
(10:30:04) crooney: Fred___, welit sounds like you want a product to sell to Adempiere users.
(10:30:04) crooney: So you want to feed of Adempiere's sucesss
(10:30:28) hengsin: !
(10:30:29) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:30:44) crooney: people come here and to compiere & open bravo and many many come back because of the support they get in IRC & Forums
(10:30:53) crooney: this is what makes adempiere great not just the code
(10:31:01) CarlosRuiz: ! call to order - please avoid specific - we'll try to establish policies
(10:31:16) crooney: .
(10:31:34) Kai_: OK, Carlos
(10:31:40) Fred___: !
(10:31:46) Kai_: So please hengsin (last on list)
(10:32:04) muthah [email@example.com] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:32:46) hengsin: banym, the problem is that is a very difficult things to do. why do we have eclipse distribution, linux distribution ? branding aside, it is an incredibly complex problem to tackle
(10:32:48) hengsin: .
(10:33:03) crooney: ! to carlos
(10:34:44) Kai_: OK, Fred___ but we should come back to the starting question
(10:34:45) Kai_: Then CarlosRuiz now
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: OK - I suppose it's enough for the first two questions:
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: - what is an extension?
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: - do we want to encourage extensions? or do we want everything goes to core?
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: Do we have agreement on this? - I think just Colin is opposing to encourage extensions.
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: If there is enough agreement we can go for the next three questions:
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: - if we would want to encourage extensions - what must be the proper way on Adempiere?
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: - what must be the behavior (open source behavior I suppose) of extensions?
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: - what about trademarks in extensions? conditions? risk management?
(10:34:56) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:35:22) Muthah_cell ha salido de la sala (quit: "Stupid 3G network").
(10:35:57) Fred___: Ok I think I need to address Colin point of view can I?
(10:36:08) crooney: well can I just say first
(10:36:13) crooney: I didn't mean to be rude .. apologises to Fred if it seemed so .. but the conversation went all about posterita so I was responding to that.
(10:36:29) Fred___: ok no offense taken
(10:36:37) Fred___: Colin, I respect you point of view and it may be seen as such.
(10:36:39) Fred___: I have developers that needs to get paid at the end of the day.
(10:36:40) Fred___: We are all making a living differently. We are in mauritus a lonely island with no market for ERP
(10:36:44) Kai_: crooney
(10:37:52) crooney: .
(10:38:14) CarlosRuiz: sorry Colin - direct question: Do we have agreement on this? - I think just Colin is opposing to encourage extensions.
(10:38:28) Kai_: crooney
(10:38:42) crooney: agreement? that we have discussed it yes ... we can continue
(10:39:30) Kai_: OK, I have no one on my list.
(10:39:32) CarlosRuiz: ok - can we continue then with the next three questions:
(10:39:32) CarlosRuiz: - if we would want to encourage extensions - what must be the proper way on Adempiere?
(10:39:32) CarlosRuiz: - what must be the behavior (open source behavior I suppose) of extensions?
(10:39:32) CarlosRuiz: - what about trademarks in extensions? conditions? risk management?
(10:39:32) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:39:33) crooney: sorry I forgot
(10:39:34) crooney: .
(10:39:40) dgvr: !
(10:39:44) jmpiloq: !
(10:39:47) Kai_: dgvr
(10:39:48) dgvr: agree with Banym re the single distribution with a "nice install wizard where you can choose 'certified' extensions" ...certification is an important issue ...it should be a process that encourages innovation and creativity...i.e. doesn't constrain it
(10:39:56) dgvr: What happenend to the issue with extensions "what type of companies we like here, what type of open-source behavior we expect here"
(10:40:07) dgvr: and is there a time limit on this meeting?
(10:40:09) dgvr: ...
(10:40:13) dgvr: oopla
(10:40:14) dgvr: .
(10:40:19) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:40:49) Kai_: jmpiloq
(10:40:54) jmpiloq: I think the main benefit of a certified extensions would be to ensure interoperability of adempiere and extension, and between extensions. But to achieve that, there has to be a clear and defined interface against which extensions can be implemented - and thus certified. Things get complicated, as soon as some parts of an extension are to be "promoted" to adempiere core. How to handle that? Moreover: who documents/maintains ext
(10:40:54) jmpiloq: ss? who certifies?
(10:40:56) jmpiloq: .
(10:41:20) Kai_: Actually we set no time limit
(10:41:20) Kai_: Should we?
(10:41:40) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:41:45) CarlosRuiz: ok, can we start discussing this:
(10:41:45) CarlosRuiz: - what must be the behavior (open source behavior I suppose) of extensions?
(10:41:45) CarlosRuiz: Can I suggest for example:
(10:42:00) CarlosRuiz: - no hiding sources
(10:42:00) CarlosRuiz: - no licensing tricks
(10:42:00) CarlosRuiz: - open for adempiere committers
(10:42:15) CarlosRuiz: - following recommended guidelines for extensions (to be defined technically)
(10:42:23) dgvr: !
(10:42:28) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:42:34) Kai_: dgvr
(10:42:37) dgvr: No time limit often leads to poor preperation and lost productivity
(10:43:07) jsSolutions: !
(10:43:14) Kai_: jsSolutions
(10:44:10) jsSolutions: Carlos' suggestions are good. For those standards, it would be better to do a wiki page to edit and publish publically. (Not that wiki guidelines have helped us so far ;) )
(10:44:11) jsSolutions: .
(10:44:27) Fred___: !
(10:44:54) Kai_: OK, I just would like to open the discussion regarding the question if we should set a time limit.
(10:45:05) Kai_: So please answer without permission....
(10:45:12) Fred___: I have about 20 more mins
(10:45:35) Fred___: but I can read the rest later
(10:45:59) jsSolutions: let's formally close at the top of the hour
(10:46:14) jsSolutions: but of course, people can chat as long as they want
(10:46:15) Fred___: ok
(10:46:19) mark_o_: ok
(10:46:19) crooney: I think 2 hours is a long time so far and see no issue with stooping and picking up again another time
(10:46:24) hengsin: yeap, agree, no meeting should runs more than 2 hours :)
(10:46:39) dgvr: !
(10:46:44) crooney: in retrospect we should of course have set some rules on that at the start i Guess
(10:47:07) Kai_: OK, I set the endpoint to 17:15
(10:47:23) Kai_: then Fred___ is next
(10:47:23) crooney: that's CET :)
(10:47:34) Kai_: Oh Sorry, 16:15 GMT :-)
(10:47:37) crooney: 17:15?
(10:47:40) crooney: :)
(10:47:43) mark_o_: :-)
(10:48:00) crooney: ok
(10:48:01) jsSolutions: whew- i thought you meant 10 more hours...
(10:48:06) crooney: lol
(10:48:07) vpj-cd [n=eEvoluti@corp-200-105-231-237-uio.punto.net.ec] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:48:34) Kai_: OK time limit set. No we continue. So shut up everyone. :-)
(10:48:42) Kai_: Fred___
(10:48:49) Fred___: Hiding sources - Are we allowed to have a SaaS version that will have some exclusive functions? This is what Posterita is planning to do. It is written on our website. I can explain my rational and fear behind.
(10:49:05) Fred___: opinion welcome?
(10:49:07) Fred___: .
(10:49:16) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:49:30) Kai_: dgvr
(10:49:33) dgvr: loo.. re the 10 hours...just a comment ...I agree with everyone re the time limit and other basics in advance...
(10:49:50) dgvr: Do we have a definition of "core" and "extenstion" yet?
(10:49:52) dgvr: What happenend to the issue with extensions "what type of companies we like here, what type of open-source behavior we expect here"
(10:50:59) Kai_: dgvr: Done?
(10:51:02) dgvr: .
(10:51:04) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:51:05) dgvr: sorry
(10:51:27) CarlosRuiz: To Fred, about Hiding sources - I would go for GPLv3 that explicitly disallows that SaaS trick
(10:51:35) CarlosRuiz: I mean we can't go for GPLv3
(10:51:42) crooney: !
(10:51:43) CarlosRuiz: but I think we need to establish that as policy
(10:51:45) armenrz [n=IceChat7@18.104.22.168] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:51:46) CarlosRuiz: here
(10:51:51) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:51:55) Kai_: crooney
(10:52:16) crooney: I was just going to point out to people the nearly done aGPL too
(10:52:21) crooney: .
(10:52:23) dgvr: !
(10:52:31) Kai_: dgvr
(10:52:37) dgvr: Are we against Saas?..
(10:52:44) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:52:48) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:52:48) jsSolutions: !
(10:52:49) dgvr: If so, may I ask why?
(10:52:51) dgvr: .
(10:52:56) CarlosRuiz: no - we're not against SaaS
(10:52:57) crooney: !
(10:53:05) CarlosRuiz: GPLv3 explicitly is against SaaS trick
(10:53:15) CarlosRuiz: as Google - that extends some things but doesn't release code
(10:53:18) CarlosRuiz: .
(10:53:25) Kai_: crooney
(10:53:41) crooney: I think Joel was next but I was just going to explain to Dave
(10:53:50) dgvr: :)
(10:53:51) crooney: that under GPL
(10:54:16) Kai_: Sorry Joel, my fault.
(10:54:21) crooney: SaaS does not contitute distribution and so code must not be released .. which Carlos touched on
(10:54:21) crooney: .
(10:54:21) jsSolutions: np :)
(10:54:32) Kai_: jsSolutions
(10:54:33) dgvr: aha..thank you
(10:54:43) Fred___: !
(10:54:52) armenrizal [n=IceChat7@22.214.171.124] ha entrado en la sala.
(10:55:26) Kai_: Joel?
(10:55:37) jsSolutions: sorry- typing
(10:55:46) jsSolutions: Very similar- I am just the parrot today :) SaaS may be a great benefit to user companies, we can't frown on it
(10:56:14) crooney: !
(10:56:22) jsSolutions: and as Colin says, its not a distribution so the provider must choose
(10:56:31) CarlosRuiz: !
(10:56:34) jsSolutions: and they can represent what they do and others can judge
(10:56:37) jsSolutions: .
(10:56:50) Kai_: Fred___
(10:57:23) Fred___: It's not clear... is Adempiere ok with Posterita having a SaaS version?
(10:57:31) Fred___: Our community version has no tricks whatsoever
(10:57:33) red1: !
(10:57:34) Fred___: and open to all
(10:57:36) Fred___: .
(10:57:44) Kai_: crooney
(10:58:28) crooney: I was going to add that I agree SaaS can be very attractive to firm that do not wish technical skills in house ... the worry is the use of SaaS to avoid sharing code
(10:59:04) crooney: but adoption of the aGPL license (not sure if GPLv3 is enough carlos but I could be wrong) would mean that issue is resolved
(10:59:13) crooney: .
(10:59:17) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(10:59:29) CarlosRuiz: well - what I'm saying is
(10:59:35) CarlosRuiz: technically
(10:59:40) CarlosRuiz: we can't go for GPLv3 or aGPL
(10:59:48) CarlosRuiz: we must stay in GPLv2
(11:00:04) CarlosRuiz: but we can define policies for extensions to avoid the called "SaaS loophole"
(11:00:20) CarlosRuiz: sorry Fred - I'm not meaning there are tricks in your code
(11:00:32) CarlosRuiz: SaaS loophole is extendedly discussed in free software discussions
(11:00:44) CarlosRuiz: and it's seem as a way to hijack without contributing
(11:00:56) CarlosRuiz: or to have hidden sources in some way
(11:01:10) CarlosRuiz: it's considered as damaging the freedom of software
(11:01:16) dgvr: !
(11:01:20) CarlosRuiz: I would prefer we avoid the SaaS loophole here
(11:01:26) CarlosRuiz: wer'e open for SaaS
(11:01:39) CarlosRuiz: but releasing properly the code as if we were in GPLv3 or aGPL
(11:01:40) CarlosRuiz: .
(11:02:10) Fred___: !
(11:02:16) jsSolutions: !
(11:02:34) Kai_: Timeout exception caught... ;-)
(11:02:36) Kai_: One more left for this an then I would to go to another point.
(11:02:45) Kai_: red1
(11:02:59) red1: thank you mr chairman...
(11:03:07) red1: If i may say, what companies want to do with the software is up to them under GPL v2 terms. I think our agenda here is what to do about our extensions and how to advice others to come to us with their extensions...
(11:03:24) red1: Thus if ABC company took any software and do Saas, so what? They can have tricks which are very fine because any law GPL for that matter is bound to have loopholes. But how they give back for any extension has to be our focus. We have to be that liberal. Posterita needs advice on how best they wish to give back extensions if any...
(11:03:42) red1: Likewise, In Trifon example, he needs to be advised how to handle another project's extension. This is what i understand of the concern Carlos raised that day. Cos by not having such a policy may confuse contributors and end up a diminished project
(11:03:45) red1: .
(11:04:08) CarlosRuiz: !
(11:04:37) Kai_: I know there are some hands left.
(11:04:50) Kai_: But we are running out of time, so I would like to lead over to technical guidelines
(11:05:05) Kai_: If nobody minds....
(11:05:13) jsSolutions: ok
(11:05:26) Kai_: Carlos? Do want to start?
(11:05:51) CarlosRuiz: again - technically we're in GPLv2 - so SaaS loophole is allowed
(11:05:51) CarlosRuiz: what I mean is if we "certify" an extension doing such extendedly discussed bad-practice for free software
(11:05:51) CarlosRuiz: so I would prefer to make clear that certified extensions must avoid the SaaS loophole - even if not compelled by the GPLv2
(11:05:51) CarlosRuiz: now to the technical guidelines I would suggest:
(11:05:59) CarlosRuiz: INITIALLY these technical guidelines (to be extended via forum discussion)
(11:05:59) CarlosRuiz: - no core (kernel-not-business) code must be modified
(11:05:59) CarlosRuiz: - recommended extension architecture -> callouts, modelvalidator, don't generate X_ classes for official adempiere tables
(11:05:59) CarlosRuiz: - ID's for extensions must be reserved officially
(11:06:01) CarlosRuiz: .
(11:06:52) Kai_: dgvr
(11:07:04) dgvr: Hello Red1....I believe that the loophole could be a problem....I'm just curious about why can't we go for GPLv3 or aGPL on future releases if they solve the SaaS problem
(11:07:19) dgvr: and second Carlos's suggestions..
(11:07:35) hengsin: !
(11:08:41) hengsin: dgvr, we can't because we are not the original owner for many of the source file in Adempiere
(11:08:43) hengsin: .
(11:09:21) Kai_: Fred___
(11:09:27) jsSolutions: !
(11:09:52) Fred___: Ok for me it is still not clear, if Adempiere will accept a Posterita SaaS
(11:09:55) CarlosRuiz: !
(11:09:59) Fred___: but I want to explain the rational
(11:10:07) Fred___: basically, we have invested a lot of money
(11:10:09) Fred___: in the code
(11:10:24) Fred___: and we basically fear, a bigger company
(11:10:31) Fred___: let's say like open bravo did to compiere
(11:10:38) Fred___: to extend and market the product
(11:10:47) Fred___: we are totally ok to open the source code
(11:10:50) Fred___: even for the saas
(11:10:54) Fred___: and we believe we will have to do it
(11:11:03) Fred___: but not until we got a minimum amount of momentum
(11:11:10) Fred___: otherwise we will be basically dead
(11:11:14) Fred___: .
(11:11:32) dgvr: !
(11:11:42) dgvr: A very, very good point....
(11:11:45) Kai_: jsSolutions
(11:12:27) jsSolutions: back to the tech standards. I agree with Carlos' suggestions. As we mature it would be good to also require an installer or 2Pack
(11:12:39) jsSolutions: .
(11:13:00) Kai_: CarlosRuiz
(11:13:20) CarlosRuiz: well - I suppose is the work from Redhuan to evangelize Fred about open source and free software :-)
(11:13:36) CarlosRuiz: in the meanwhile you can look for "SaaS loophole" or "ASP loophole" in google
(11:13:42) CarlosRuiz: my few words about are
(11:13:51) CarlosRuiz: what if Adempiere start thinking the same way?
(11:14:14) CarlosRuiz: and we start hiding SaaS code - then Posterita won't have future - neither any extension - because the central would have the control
(11:14:22) CarlosRuiz: that's the trick trying to extend compiere or openbravo
(11:14:30) CarlosRuiz: you can't be sure that they don't start hiding code
(11:14:33) Fred___: !
(11:14:34) CarlosRuiz: and break your extensions
(11:14:40) red1: !
(11:14:42) CarlosRuiz: here we need to go deeper
(11:14:52) CarlosRuiz: and about fear of something bigger - I doubt it
(11:14:56) CarlosRuiz: as Redhuan say
(11:15:00) CarlosRuiz: you'll put the flag first
(11:15:01) CarlosRuiz: .
(11:15:14) Kai_: Fred___ : (quick pleas)
(11:15:24) Fred___: agree with you carlos
(11:15:32) Fred___: If adempiere was agpl
(11:15:36) Fred___: then it protects everyone
(11:15:38) Fred___: even our work
(11:15:43) Fred___: but it doesn't
(11:15:49) Fred___: so I am willing to play fair
(11:15:54) Fred___: but other has no scrupule
(11:16:00) armenrz ha salido de la sala (quit: Connection timed out).
(11:16:02) Fred___: how do I protect myself?
(11:16:04) Fred___: .
(11:16:12) Kai_: red1
(11:16:18) red1: thanks again mr chairman, you been wonderful ... (pretty quick here cos i type ahead ! :) ....
(11:16:21) red1: I often feel that ppl miscalculate FOSS and how to market their products with FOSS. Nobody can steal what is free. OB did not steal from Compiere in that way. They used $$$ to do that i.e. reverse engineered Compiere. It was also Compiere's fault, using the same line of thinking Fred (with due respect) uses here. By faltering, they allow others to take the cup. But then ADempiere is born and we are leading and will diminish OB easily
(11:16:44) dgvr: !
(11:16:50) red1: .
(11:16:58) Kai_: dgvr
(11:17:02) dgvr: Just a quick comment ...I don't know how everybody else found it todays...but I found the meeting and how it was conducted to be was very impressive
(11:17:04) dgvr: Speaking for myself only ...thanks to all involved
(11:17:21) jsSolutions: !
(11:17:32) Kai_: OK, our offical time is over.
(11:17:53) Kai_: So there would be the question regarding trademarks left.
(11:18:04) jsSolutions: then I speak freely ;) Yes, well done Kai! moderator here is tricky!
(11:18:14) dgvr: yo
(11:18:44) CarlosRuiz: thanks a lot to Kai for moderating - and thanks a lot to everybody for respecting the moderation
(11:18:44) CarlosRuiz: can we freely speak a little about trademarks?
(11:18:54) Fred___: Thanks everyone, guess there are issues still pending. But yes it was a great meeting.
(11:19:03) Fred___: ok shoot
(11:19:09) mark_o_: thanx all, great discussion
(11:19:25) CarlosRuiz: what really worries me about trademarked extensions is what happened to twiki this week
(11:19:37) Kai_: Actually I learned during this session.
(11:19:55) Kai_: So next time I wouldn't wast too much time at the begining.
(11:19:55) CarlosRuiz: but I suppose we can be open for trademarked extensions meanwhile they "behaves" properly according to the free-software definition
(11:19:57) Kai_: :-)
(11:20:15) red1: that the exclamation mark was misunderstood all this while
(11:20:41) trifon_: Carlos, what means open for trademark extensions?
(11:21:03) trifon_: does it mean we allow trademark to go in adempiere?
(11:21:21) CarlosRuiz: my guess is - to be open for trademarked extensions - and allow them (as extensions) meanwhile they "behaves"
(11:21:21) CarlosRuiz: if the trademarked extension wants to go core - then it must not be trademarked in core
(11:21:21) CarlosRuiz: and if the trademarked extension starts to behave unproperly (open-source definition) then a fork without trademark can be considered
(11:21:21) mark_o_: not in adempiere core, but in the extension
(11:21:29) red1: Open and company style branding in my opinon is ok.. and should not be confused with trademark which restricts others from its territory by legal means. A brand may not stop others to use it. Compiere doesnt want us to use it. Does Posterita refuse us to use it? It is up to Posterita to donate its brand to the project with condition that other companies do not use it other than in OSS only.
(11:22:02) trifon_: ok. i understadn, thank's. i also agree. core is free of tgrademarks. only adempeire.
(11:22:24) CarlosRuiz: that's just my guess - we're not taking decisions here
(11:22:33) red1: A brand that can be 'used' thruout a project and by its advocates and most of all show the bazaar spirit has to be allowed. In my early opinon of posterita startup, i held that posterita fulfill that image. How to 'give up' that brand, its up to Posterita.
(11:22:37) trifon_: yes. i was just asking for clarification.
(11:23:11) trifon_: tehre is technical issue too. at the moment fork happens both projects start having differeetn functionality.
(11:23:35) trifon_: so both must have different name.
(11:23:47) Fred___: Then call it trifon POS
(11:24:05) Fred___: no sarcasm here
(11:24:15) trifon_: yes.
(11:24:30) trifon_: for example now. Vicotr put MFG wihch we call Libero. but it is only in adempire.
(11:24:35) crooney: re: GPL .. I see now ... often you see "code is released under GPL version 2 or later” - compiere even used that with their CPL wording but the changed it when the moved to GPL to under the terms version 2 of the GNU General Public License
(11:24:39) crooney: so I see you point Carlos
(11:24:49) trifon_: if victor decide to release his own version of Ademprie and libero in it then we must change the name.
(11:25:37) red1: exactly trifon .. so in posterita case we need not change the name ... until they comercialise something that disturbs that
(11:25:47) CarlosRuiz: there is no libero within adempiere
(11:25:57) CarlosRuiz: it's just manufacturing - payroll - etc
(11:26:05) trifon_: yes. i know.
(11:26:13) trifon_: but libero is just synonym.
(11:26:30) red1: and also a brandname (non trademarkable)
(11:26:41) red1: name rcognition
(11:26:54) CarlosRuiz: if posterita POS is going to adempiere core - it must be simply the POS - or the webPOS
(11:26:54) CarlosRuiz: because we can have problems with trademarks
(11:27:26) red1: but CarlosRuiz .. as trifon said... we only need to act when that happens
(11:27:31) CarlosRuiz: that's why I guess we must try to keep them as an extension also - to be friendly - meanwhile they behave according to some rules - we promote them
(11:27:47) red1: just like in Compiere case, only when they say do not use their name, that we do not
(11:28:05) red1: we have to be brand friendly to contributors
(11:28:17) Fred___: we are ok with Adempiere having our trademark
(11:28:21) Fred___: it is beneficial for us
(11:28:27) Fred___: in fact that's what we have been fighting for
(11:28:36) Fred___: so I don't see why I should disagree to that
(11:28:37) CarlosRuiz: I suppose unless the trademark would be explicitly passed to adempiere - that could be a matter of risk for adempiere
(11:28:47) Fred___: not really
(11:28:52) Fred___: like red1 says
(11:28:52) CarlosRuiz: remember the twiki issue
(11:28:57) Fred___: it can be removed
(11:29:08) red1: ask Alex to draft a legal letter allowing co use under FOSS terms only for ADempiere
(11:29:13) crooney: yes Carlos I see your point
(11:29:17) hengsin: red1, just to clarify - using a register trademark without permission is illegal, we should be careful with that.
(11:29:19) red1: its a dual trademark
(11:29:42) red1: absolutely.. thats why i said only when that TM is stated otherwise.. or legallised for us
(11:30:04) CarlosRuiz: yes - it can be simple - asking for permission to use the trademark when integrating into core
(11:30:04) CarlosRuiz: if permission granted - then trademark could be used - if denied - then we rename
(11:30:04) red1: if the TM says "yes we allow FOSS to use us" then IMHO it shuld be ok
(11:30:12) Fred___: yes
(11:30:19) red1: but if FSF says no, then hengsin is rite
(11:30:31) CarlosRuiz: linux is a trademark - and they have policies about "fair use"
(11:30:38) red1: but i have another issue with posterita
(11:30:49) Fred___: which is?
(11:30:50) red1: it also has to recognise others that contribute to it
(11:31:00) vpj-cd: trifon_ the name is only alias for or project name
(11:31:03) Fred___: well Adempiere has not been rebranded
(11:31:18) Fred___: and yes i intend to recognise the contributors
(11:31:26) vpj-cd: I in e-Evolution only want that the community know what are the contribution the e-Evolution
(11:31:30) Fred___: do not do to others
(11:31:35) Fred___: what you do not want they to do to you
(11:31:47) trifon_: vpj-cd: know. i just took libero as example.
(11:31:48) vpj-cd: then software is free and is GPL because ADempiere is GPL
(11:31:54) red1: perhaps i can use eEvolution as example... it recognises others really well
(11:32:04) Fred___: If triffon wants to invest effort in Posterita, we are willing to give him some sort of special status/partnership
(11:32:12) vpj-cd: so any software create under ADempiere need be GPL2
(11:32:28) vpj-cd: is the license
(11:33:10) dgvr: Its very important that Adempiere has only 1 name and that name applies to all of its "extensions". Each extension should only have a generic functional identification as an option WITHIN Adempiere
(11:33:35) vpj-cd: as I said before the best marketing for an implementor is know your contribution
(11:33:36) vpj-cd: in world
(11:33:36) red1: Fred___: that is good with regard to trifon.. it is thus something that JJ refused to do !
(11:33:53) Fred___: yes, he gives us time
(11:33:55) trifon_: Also to clarify what means extension. usualy people think something which you can just enable/disable wehn you want.
(11:33:58) Fred___: we give him recognition
(11:34:10) red1: if u re willing to 'dilute' your IP so to speak... the way u did with George Orwell's hold on satirism
(11:34:18) CarlosRuiz: I suppose the "trademark" policies on extensions is something we need to ellaborate more - thinking on risks
(11:34:28) vpj-cd: when you take the decision for create under ADempiere your extention is GPLV!
(11:34:30) vpj-cd: 2
(11:34:39) Fred___: yes we are gpl2
(11:34:45) Fred___: he can contribute
(11:34:47) Fred___: in our svn
(11:35:03) trifon_: yes.
(11:35:12) Fred___: everybody is welcome, I may not have learned everything red1
(11:35:16) Fred___: but you taught us lot still
(11:35:17) vpj-cd: now I think the answered is in the trademark
(11:35:22) vpj-cd: ie MYSQL
(11:35:25) trifon_: ok generally. wha ti see is that most of Adempeire comunity agree to have trademark free Adempeire.
(11:35:36) red1: but not as well about Animal Farm :D
(11:35:48) vpj-cd: they say the trademark only can are using as adjective
(11:35:51) red1: so trifon, now you are bigger hero than i thought !
(11:35:59) vpj-cd: do as subject or verbs
(11:36:10) red1: u own... how many?... 2? ... oh 3 projects !
(11:36:10) vpj-cd: do not as subject or verbs
(11:36:30) red1: vpj-cd: i think its up to us
(11:36:33) Fred___: ok i got to go
(11:36:39) red1: we need not follow mySQL
(11:36:49) CarlosRuiz: thanks a lot Fred___
(11:36:54) CarlosRuiz: for attending and for your openness
(11:37:01) Fred___: there are still pending issues, the channel for discussion here is open
(11:37:03) vpj-cd: the issue with the trademark is the legal issues
(11:37:07) Fred___: you are welcome carlosruiz
(11:37:30) Fred___: thanks red1
(11:37:33) Fred___: bye all
(11:37:35) red1: i will linger by the barn here... *waving paws to Fred___
(11:37:36) red1: bye
(11:37:44) crooney: bye fred
(11:37:49) trifon_: bye Fred
(11:37:51) red1: u re welcome Fred___
(11:37:52) mark_o_: bye Fred___
(11:38:19) Fred___: byyye thanks again
(11:38:24) Fred___ ha salido de la sala (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.83 [Firefox 3.0.3/2008092417]").
(11:38:31) trifon_: if i understadn correctly if we allow trademark to go in ademprie and we do not have permission than trademrak owner can go to each use and ask him to stop using adempeire, is that right?
(11:38:52) jsSolutions: no
(11:39:00) jsSolutions: just to stop using trademark
(11:39:06) trifon_: ok. Joel can you please describe more?
(11:39:11) red1: and thanks
(11:39:31) trifon_: so trademrak owner will ask ademprie project to wtop using his trademark?
(11:39:44) jsSolutions: yes, and then it can be deleted
(11:39:53) jsSolutions: good work for freelancer! :)
(11:40:23) red1: but trifon u make more money
(11:40:38) red1: cos u ask trademarker to pay u to take the trademark out
(11:40:41) CarlosRuiz: ok - gtg - I'll leave this window open to read your last comments later - thanks to all - excellent meeting
(11:40:41) CarlosRuiz: hope this IRC chat goes to wiki page - and maybe if somebody can contribute with a summary
(11:40:50) red1: by that time, ppl will call it trifon POS already
(11:40:51) trifon_: but if we ask for legal permission from trademark owner then ademprie can distribute product with his trademark to as many users as adempeire owants, is that right?
(11:41:08) red1: have a nice day CarlosRuiz
(11:41:13) mark_o_: Carlos, thanx. Cya
(11:41:40) jsSolutions: trifon, yes, I suppose
(11:41:41) trifon_: red1: i just want to understand how legally things are.
(11:41:59) red1: i know... and your questions are right
(11:42:09) red1: i was just making jokes
(11:42:13) red1: otherwise i be shouting
(11:42:22) trifon_: ok. but then trademark owner do not have any protection anymore.
(11:42:39) red1: nope it depends on the conditions
(11:42:46) red1: just like copyleft
(11:42:50) red1: its also copyright
(11:42:57) red1: but the conditions are different
(11:43:14) red1: it gives u the right to distribute.. etc... but do not remove my name
(11:43:30) red1: or exclude others name that contributes
(11:45:49) dgvr: The point is to build in better ERP solution....not to built in "obsolescence" into the AD offer as a trick to extact more service $ from the client
(11:46:04) mwagner [n=mwagner@p5485C144.dip.t-dialin.net] ha entrado en la sala.
(11:46:08) dgvr: That is a very poor long term strategy
(11:46:15) mark_o_: I'm off for today guys.
(11:46:18) mark_o_: Thanx for the lively discussion (without anybody been shot ;-) ) Cya tomorrow again.
(11:46:33) dgvr: Way to go Trifon
(11:46:43) trifon_: bye Mark
(11:46:57) mwagner ha salido de la sala ("Ex-Chat").
(11:46:59) dgvr: Where are the minutes kept?
(11:47:45) dgvr: Who is responsible for creating the minutes by teh way?
(11:48:34) trifon_ ha salido de la sala (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.83 [Firefox 126.96.36.199/2008070205]").
(11:48:54) mark_o_ ha salido de la sala (quit: "Bye-bye everybody.").
(11:49:07) hengsin: bye guys
(11:49:11) muthah ha salido de la sala (quit: Connection timed out).
(11:49:11) red1: its in our logs
(11:49:17) hengsin ha salido de la sala.
(11:49:24) red1: back to main room
(11:49:25) dgvr: sure..but where are the minutes
(11:49:33) red1 ha salido de la sala.
(11:50:44) banym ha salido de la sala ("Verlassend").
(11:56:07) #adempiere-team: modo (+vv armenrizal Bahman ) por crooney
(11:56:18) crooney: sorry just exprimenting here
(11:59:38) #adempiere-team: modo (+v jmpiloq ) por crooney
(11:59:46) wkana ha salido de la sala (quit: "Verlassend").
(12:00:03) Kai_ ha salido de la sala (quit: "Bye").
(12:00:33) jmpiloq ha salido de la sala ("Kopete 0.12.5 : http://kopete.kde.org").
(12:09:16) vpj-cd ha salido de la sala (quit: ).
(12:12:21) armenrizal ha salido de la sala (quit: "Not that there is anything wrong with that").
(12:14:04) dladwig ha salido de la sala (quit: "levaing meeting (Thanks Everyone)").
(12:20:41) vpj-cd [n=eEvoluti@corp-200-105-231-237-uio.punto.net.ec] ha entrado en la sala.