Roundcube merger - Ideas from atmail
charles at charlesmcnulty.com
Wed Jul 26 16:49:51 CEST 2006
Okay, I've read the e-mail a few times and I think I understand what's
going on here. @mail realizes that no matter what they'll always have
to compete with RC, so what they want to do, in essence, is put an @mail
t-shirt on RC, so that wherever RC goes it will be advertising their
competing product. And they want to pay Thomas to allow them to put
that t-shirt on, and to integrate some of their feature into roundcube
(or vice-versa - doesnt' really matter since they'll be the same thing)
This is all up-side it seems to me. Thomas get's some money, and free
trips to Australia. RC get's renamed (who cares?) and get's some new
If @mail would be willing to pay you to rename and rebrand RC and the
website, and then have their engineers submit patches to you the same as
anyone else, I think that would be great. On the other hand if you're
going to rebrand RC for cash, you might as well offer the same deal to
@mail's competitors and see if you can get a better deal!
If @mail wants to take control of the source and community with the
purpose of choking and killing it, then as has been suggested, roundcube
will simply pop back up with a new name.
In conclusion, don't be afraid to make a buck off of all the hard work
you've done, but get a lawyer and consider the real possibility of a
set-back in the project if @mail doesn't work in good faith.
Paul Waring wrote:
> On 26/07/06, Thomas Bruederli <roundcube at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just wanted to forward a mail I've got yesterday and would like to
>> hear your opinions about this topic. Either this could make RoundCube
>> grow faster or atmail just wants to get rid of some (more and more
>> serious) competition.
> Their home page reads:
> "Filtering out the white noise of growing open-source options, @Mail
> is a reliable and complete messaging platform that includes full
> source code for complete control."
> Doesn't sound as if they're terribly keen on open source to me...
> Anyway, if they want the advantages/features of Roundcube, they can
> take them, provided they abide by the terms of the GPL. I don't see
> why they'd have to license the name or buy the domain if they just
> want to improve and open source their existing product. There's also
> nothing to stop them offering commercial support for Roundcube if they
> want, as far as I'm aware that's perfectly legitimate under the GPL.
More information about the Dev