[Foundation-l] Open source CRM needed for Wikimedia

Tue Jun 27 15:26:41 UTC 2006

I forgot to add that it has a full English translation package in it so
you won't have to translate the main program. :)

On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 10:24 -0500, Brian Wolfe wrote:
> I was asked recently by a client to install an offshoot of SugarCRM
> called C3CRM from a Chinese group that was adding the security and
> reporting features to their latest beta.  I do not know how complete
> either feature is, but it may be worth checking out. The installer is in
> Chinese so you will have to have installed SugarCRM once before and view
> the fields to understand what each field is for in the installer.
> 
> Might be worth a checkout.
> 
> On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 08:43 -0400, Brad Patrick wrote:
> > To follow up on the discussion about the SugarCRM Open vs. Professional:
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > 
> > One of the key differentiators between Sugar Open Source and Sugar
> > Professional is the team security functionality.  With Sugar Open Source,
> > all users within your Sugar instance can view all records, without any
> > restrictions.  With Sugar Professional, all records have a field for "Team"
> > which gives permission for visibility.  You still have the flexibility of
> > giving full visibility by selecting the Global team, however you can be more
> > restrictive on sensitive data, such as donor information.
> > 
> > Another key differentiation is that Sugar Professional has reporting
> > functionalities.  This allows all users to generate reports on any module
> > they wish.  The data from reports is exportable, and you can also generate
> > graphical representations of the reports that can be displayed on your
> > individual "Dashboard".  Sugar Professional reports honor the security set
> > by teams so each user can only run reports on data they have visibility to.
> > 
> > As for customizations you make that you wish to push back to Sugar Open
> > Source, the first thing to be aware of is that Sugar Open Source is licensed
> > under the Sugar Public License which you can view at:
> > http://www.sugarforge.org/content/open-source/public-license.php.  Any new
> > modules you create can be licensed under either the SPL or the commercial
> > license, as long as you are not modifying existing files.  If you make
> > modifications to existing files within Sugar Professional (such as layout
> > changes) and wish to push those to the Sugar Open Source community then you
> > would need our permission to have those fall under the SPL instead of the
> > commercial license.  This is something that we would consider; it would just
> > depend on the type of work was done, and which files were modified.
> > 
> > [/snip]
> > So, the takeaway from this is that (a) Sugar Open doesn't have any reporting
> > module at all; (b) the plug in modules for email and document management
> > only work (presently) under the commercial license (though that may change
> > in the future); (c) Sugar Open is limited in the zones of security it can
> > offer based on "role" (y/n access to a particular module) vs. "team" (y/n
> > data elements within module) level of security present in Pro.  The
> > hierarchical group security model would work well differentiating volunteers
> > from staff, access to data for reporting, and so forth.  That seems to make
> > a lot of sense to us as an organization for our particular needs.
> > 
> > The Sugar Open Source license is the Mozilla Open Source license modified to
> > cover SugarCRM.  See
> > http://www.sugarforge.org/content/open-source/public-license-faq.php
> > .   I like the idea of us developing tools we need and putting it back into
> > the source tree generally.  We still need to be clear on the requirements.
> > If it means deploying intially under the Pro license and pushing on the
> > sugarforge community to free up modules etc. and making the open product
> > better, I think we satisfy Eloquence's cautionary notes, which apply to any
> > commercial-where-free-isn't-quite-yet-there software.
> > 
> > The proprietary license is at
> > https://www.sugarcrm.com/crm/products/on-premise-eula.html.  (SJ, you ain't
> > gonna like it.)
> > 
> > Talk amongst yourselves. ;-)
> > 
> > -Brad
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l