Idea: OFBiz self-hosting
Locked
123
123
 
|
Hi devs,
the OFBiz CMS application is having more and more improvements and this is really good. However (as read on ML) more seems to be done. I was thinking that a using OFBiz CMS to host the www.ofbiz.org web site instead of Confluence would be the best way to have all contributors to see how the CMS works and where it needs to be improved. Probably, at this stage, this will sound a crazy idea but I would like to hear what you guy that know the real OFBIZ CMS actual features think about it. Having a CMS hosting its own website is something obvious (all CMS do this). Of course OFBiz is not a CMS only but, again, I think this is the best way to power the CMS up. My two cents, Bruno |
Administrator
|
Interesting idea... Looking forward for comments...
Jacques From: "Bruno Busco" <[hidden email]> > Hi devs, > the OFBiz CMS application is having more and more improvements and this is > really good. However (as read on ML) more seems to be done. > > I was thinking that a using OFBiz CMS to host the www.ofbiz.org web site > instead of Confluence would be the best way to have all contributors to see > how the CMS works and where it needs to be improved. > Probably, at this stage, this will sound a crazy idea but I would like to > hear what you guy that know the real OFBIZ CMS actual features think about > it. > > Having a CMS hosting its own website is something obvious (all CMS do this). > Of course OFBiz is not a CMS only but, again, I think this is the best way > to power the CMS up. > > My two cents, > Bruno > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bruno Busco
Bruno Busco wrote: > Hi devs, > the OFBiz CMS application is having more and more improvements and this is > really good. However (as read on ML) more seems to be done. > > I was thinking that a using OFBiz CMS to host the www.ofbiz.org web site > instead of Confluence would be the best way to have all contributors to see > how the CMS works and where it needs to be improved. > Probably, at this stage, this will sound a crazy idea but I would like to > hear what you guy that know the real OFBIZ CMS actual features think about > it. When you wrote www.ofbiz.org did you mean "ofbiz.apache.org" or "docs.ofbiz.org"? If you meant ofbiz.apache.org, then we'd have to come up with something pretty creative that not only allows for content management, but also did a static HTML export since that's all we can do on that server. Even if we did that we'd have to work with the ASF infra to figure out where to host an instance of OFBiz that could be used to drive the exports for the site. If you meant docs.ofbiz.org then we'd have to write something that offers sufficient wiki functionality to replace the confluence application running there. That would certainly be done based on the OFBiz content management stuff, but it hasn't been done yet. -David |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
I like the Geronimo Project site http://geronimo.apache.org/, wish we could see something like that in OFbiz home page..
Enrique Ruibal
|
|
|
I'm interested in what you mean by this... What is it that you like on the Geronimo site? -David Enrique Ruibal wrote: > I like the Geronimo Project site http://geronimo.apache.org/, wish we could > see something like that in OFbiz home page.. > > Enrique Ruibal > > > > jacques.le.roux wrote: >> Interesting idea... Looking forward for comments... >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Bruno Busco" <[hidden email]> >>> Hi devs, >>> the OFBiz CMS application is having more and more improvements and this >>> is >>> really good. However (as read on ML) more seems to be done. >>> >>> I was thinking that a using OFBiz CMS to host the www.ofbiz.org web site >>> instead of Confluence would be the best way to have all contributors to >>> see >>> how the CMS works and where it needs to be improved. >>> Probably, at this stage, this will sound a crazy idea but I would like to >>> hear what you guy that know the real OFBIZ CMS actual features think >>> about >>> it. >>> >>> Having a CMS hosting its own website is something obvious (all CMS do >>> this). >>> Of course OFBiz is not a CMS only but, again, I think this is the best >>> way >>> to power the CMS up. >>> >>> My two cents, >>> Bruno >>> >> > |
|
|
1) First of all you have a search box on the main page I assume it is useful to search the whole site, including wiki pages.
2) you have nabble forumes nicely embedded in the portal page 3) You have main issues resolved / Opened on the main page 4) You have a newer version of confluence in their wiki with navigation buttons and all.. Those are a few things a I notice a first glance Enrique Ruibal
|
|
|
In reply to this post by David E Jones
David,
I meant docs.ofbiz.org, the one that is hosted at hotwaxmedia (more controllable). IMO the confluence wiki functionality is surely usefull but not strictly necessary and in OFBiz it is not as urgent as an user friendly CMS feature. For instance at http://drupal.org/handbooks they handle all the documentation, the contributed modules repository and more, without wiki, just CMS. And it looks very well !! Does the OFBIz CMS handle the contents versioning? If yes it could be enough. -Bruno 2008/8/31 David E. Jones <[hidden email]> > > > Bruno Busco wrote: > >> Hi devs, >> the OFBiz CMS application is having more and more improvements and this is >> really good. However (as read on ML) more seems to be done. >> >> I was thinking that a using OFBiz CMS to host the www.ofbiz.org web site >> instead of Confluence would be the best way to have all contributors to >> see >> how the CMS works and where it needs to be improved. >> Probably, at this stage, this will sound a crazy idea but I would like to >> hear what you guy that know the real OFBIZ CMS actual features think about >> it. >> > > When you wrote www.ofbiz.org did you mean "ofbiz.apache.org" or " > docs.ofbiz.org"? > > If you meant ofbiz.apache.org, then we'd have to come up with something > pretty creative that not only allows for content management, but also did a > static HTML export since that's all we can do on that server. Even if we did > that we'd have to work with the ASF infra to figure out where to host an > instance of OFBiz that could be used to drive the exports for the site. > > If you meant docs.ofbiz.org then we'd have to write something that offers > sufficient wiki functionality to replace the confluence application running > there. That would certainly be done based on the OFBiz content management > stuff, but it hasn't been done yet. > > -David > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Enrique Ruibal
Yes, those sound like they would be great additions to the OFBiz site. Geronimo, like many ASF projects, maintain their site in Confluence and then export the static PDF for the actual HTML pages you see on the public facing sites (the ASF has things setup this way to handle volume more efficiently). We could certainly do all of these things with OFBiz, someone just has to invest the time. It's back to the little red hen thingy: "who will help me make the bread".... BTW, I don't think Geronimo is using a newer version of Confluence. All of the cwiki.apache.org sites are running Confluence 2.2.9, which is a pain because it's from 2006 and is even OLDER than the one we're using on docs.ofbiz.org. That's actually one of the main roadblocks that is keeping us from moving the docs.ofbiz.org content onto cwiki.apache.org... -David Enrique Ruibal wrote: > 1) First of all you have a search box on the main page I assume it is useful > to search the whole site, including wiki pages. > > 2) you have nabble forumes nicely embedded in the portal page > > 3) You have main issues resolved / Opened on the main page > > 4) You have a newer version of confluence in their wiki with navigation > buttons and all.. > > Those are a few things a I notice a first glance > > Enrique Ruibal > > > > > > > David E. Jones-2 wrote: >> >> I'm interested in what you mean by this... >> >> What is it that you like on the Geronimo site? >> >> -David >> >> >> Enrique Ruibal wrote: >>> I like the Geronimo Project site http://geronimo.apache.org/, wish we >>> could >>> see something like that in OFbiz home page.. >>> >>> Enrique Ruibal >>> >>> >>> >>> jacques.le.roux wrote: >>>> Interesting idea... Looking forward for comments... >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Bruno Busco" <[hidden email]> >>>>> Hi devs, >>>>> the OFBiz CMS application is having more and more improvements and this >>>>> is >>>>> really good. However (as read on ML) more seems to be done. >>>>> >>>>> I was thinking that a using OFBiz CMS to host the www.ofbiz.org web >>>>> site >>>>> instead of Confluence would be the best way to have all contributors to >>>>> see >>>>> how the CMS works and where it needs to be improved. >>>>> Probably, at this stage, this will sound a crazy idea but I would like >>>>> to >>>>> hear what you guy that know the real OFBIZ CMS actual features think >>>>> about >>>>> it. >>>>> >>>>> Having a CMS hosting its own website is something obvious (all CMS do >>>>> this). >>>>> Of course OFBiz is not a CMS only but, again, I think this is the best >>>>> way >>>>> to power the CMS up. >>>>> >>>>> My two cents, >>>>> Bruno >>>>> >> > |
|
|
David E. Jones wrote: > Geronimo, like many ASF projects, maintain their site in Confluence and > then export the static PDF for the actual HTML pages you see on the > public facing sites (the ASF has things setup this way to handle volume > more efficiently). Whoops, I didn't mean "static PDF" I meant "static HTML"... I guess I type "static" and "PDF" together way too often or something... -David |
|
|
In reply to this post by David E Jones
I can understand Bruno's point in trying to use Ofbiz CMS capabilities to reproduce Ofbiz Site as a proof of use. However I think if Ofbiz is part of ASF we should try to standarize into what everybody at ASF is using, because this is one of the strenghts of this project (being part of ASF). I see that many ASF projects have set up their confluence spaces on the apache infrastructure and ofbiz project should do the same at some point. With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.org vs. cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for apache to upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their servers? Enrique Ruibal |
|
|
Enrique Ruibal wrote: > With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.org vs. > cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for apache to > upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their servers? That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to an older version might cause problems when exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for a significant amount of time before people eventually weed them all out. I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to update soon, but I've been thinking that for a while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know. -David |
|
|
I checked current apache confluence version is 2.2.9 Build:#527 from Sep 07, 2006, and Ofbiz confluence version is 2.2.10 Build:#528 Nov 29, 2006, I guess they are about the same? just curious how much difference could be.
Enrique Ruibal
|
|
|
I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
standard and use their infra and tools. So what can we do, in order to have the OFBiz CMS more visible? Could we consider to have more demo data like we have for ecommerce? I mean, could we expand the ecommerce demo site adding several static/dynamic pages? A more real blog, some articles, a more real forum with several discussions, a FAQ section. Someone that knows how the CMS works could start adding such a structure so that others (including me) could add contents, text, images etc. Does this make sense? -Bruno 2008/9/1 Enrique Ruibal <[hidden email]> > > I checked current apache confluence version is 2.2.9 Build:#527 from Sep > 07, > 2006, and Ofbiz confluence version is 2.2.10 Build:#528 Nov 29, 2006, I > guess they are about the same? just curious how much difference could be. > > Enrique Ruibal > > > > David E. Jones-2 wrote: > > > > > > > > Enrique Ruibal wrote: > >> With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.orgvs. > >> cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for > apache > >> to > >> upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their > >> servers? > > > > That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to > > an older version might cause problems when > > exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for > > a significant amount of time before people > > eventually weed them all out. > > > > I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to > > update soon, but I've been thinking that for a > > while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know. > > > > -David > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19248525.html > Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > |
|
|
I was planning on working on the forums section, after I finish up a few
other things. We use the forums in-house here - I set it up as its own webapp. I would like to get some of that code back into the project. -Adrian Bruno Busco wrote: > I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the > standard and use their infra and tools. > > So what can we do, in order to have the OFBiz CMS more visible? > Could we consider to have more demo data like we have for ecommerce? > I mean, could we expand the ecommerce demo site adding several > static/dynamic pages? > A more real blog, some articles, a more real forum with several discussions, > a FAQ section. > Someone that knows how the CMS works could start adding such a structure so > that others (including me) could add contents, text, images etc. > Does this make sense? > -Bruno > > 2008/9/1 Enrique Ruibal <[hidden email]> > >> I checked current apache confluence version is 2.2.9 Build:#527 from Sep >> 07, >> 2006, and Ofbiz confluence version is 2.2.10 Build:#528 Nov 29, 2006, I >> guess they are about the same? just curious how much difference could be. >> >> Enrique Ruibal >> >> >> >> David E. Jones-2 wrote: >>> >>> >>> Enrique Ruibal wrote: >>>> With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.orgvs. >>>> cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for >> apache >>>> to >>>> upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their >>>> servers? >>> That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to >>> an older version might cause problems when >>> exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for >>> a significant amount of time before people >>> eventually weed them all out. >>> >>> I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to >>> update soon, but I've been thinking that for a >>> while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know. >>> >>> -David >>> >>> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19248525.html >> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bruno Busco
+1
Great idea Bruno, I agree with you that CMS is a strong component within ofbiz and these suggestions are great -Enrique Ruibal |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bruno Busco
Bruno Busco schrieb:
> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the > standard and use their infra and tools. Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence, others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages, see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details) -- Christian |
|
|
Christian Geisert wrote:
> Bruno Busco schrieb: >> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the >> standard and use their infra and tools. > > Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence, > others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement > from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example > the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya > itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages, > see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details) Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked. If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages, but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy your product in the first place? Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static; but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to *require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane. |
|
|
Just out of curiosity, who funds all this infrastructure?
Adam Heath sent the following on 9/3/2008 9:17 PM: > Christian Geisert wrote: >> Bruno Busco schrieb: >>> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the >>> standard and use their infra and tools. >> Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence, >> others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement >> from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example >> the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya >> itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages, >> see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details) > > Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked. > > If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages, > but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy > your product in the first place? > > Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static; > but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe > some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even > some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to > *require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane. > > > |
|
In reply to this post by Adam Heath-2
My company, Antwebsystems.com is only (keeps us very busy) providing
services around OFBiz, no other systems, just OFBiz. How can i make my customers clear that using OFBiz is the way to go if I am not using it myself? Our site, customer request system(myPage,ordermgr), project management, email, invoicing, is all run from OFBiz and we are going to use more and more.... I also think that the main OFBiz site, ofbiz.apache.org should be run from OFBiz, i personally think it is pretty weak if it is not. I am prepared to make server space or development effort available to make this possible. It would be rather nice however to run the system from the apache servers. Also, as was suggested before, to sell Apache and ofbiz gear from that site. I am living in Asia and can provide the products (hats, tshirts etc) cheap. just my 2 cents..... Regards, Hans Bakker CEO Antwebsystems.com -- Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive prices |
|
|
In reply to this post by BJ Freeman
Not Adam Heath obviously... ;) -David BJ Freeman wrote: > Just out of curiosity, who funds all this infrastructure? > > Adam Heath sent the following on 9/3/2008 9:17 PM: >> Christian Geisert wrote: >>> Bruno Busco schrieb: >>>> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the >>>> standard and use their infra and tools. >>> Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence, >>> others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement >>> from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example >>> the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya >>> itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages, >>> see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details) >> Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked. >> >> If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages, >> but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy >> your product in the first place? >> >> Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static; >> but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe >> some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even >> some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to >> *require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane. >> >> >> > |
«
Return to OFBiz - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |