Nice job on keeping the download site up-to-date.

[Milind P]

ok.. here's my two cents... OfBiz is too complicated for the noobs. Ofbiz is
an extremely powerful framework. But with power comes responsibility. You
should be expected to spend 200-400 hours in understanding ofBiz., Anyone
who has dealt with commercial ERP (some of my "favorite" vendors come to
mind) would tell you that this is a awesome deal. Let me not even mention
what the other "vendors" make you go through.

Newbies (as opposed to noobs) will figure it out. ok.. a link is missing
here and there..so what ? Build a distribution of oFbiz on AWS or something
and then you won't need to rely on this infrastructure; if that is your pain
(it certainly is NOT mine).

I believe that ofbiz is much better than the rest of the open source erps.
It is a lot easier to integrate and has a well thought out framework.

Regards

-- Milind


On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Matt Warnock <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
> broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
> store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
> we go along.
>
> The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
> demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
> chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
> changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
> little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
> underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
> what the problem is?
>
> Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
> download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
> as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
> them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
> broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
> opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
> important in that newbies see them first.
>
>
> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> > Hi Jacques:
> > That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
> >
> > My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major
> > regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about
> > it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the
> > second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash
> > page.
> >
> > It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind
> > would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A
> > prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that
> > maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some
> > other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot
> > pole.
> >
> > Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code,
> > because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then,
> > well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a
> > clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable
> > enough for my tastes.
> >
> > And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I
> > for one am pretty sure I know why.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ruth
> >
> > Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > > Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for
> > > instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
> > > We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance,
> > > some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure
> > > but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other
> > > SEs) knows about it...
> > >
> > > Jacques
> > >
> > > From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
> > > Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message -
> > > so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude,
> > > I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us
> > > help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see
> > > when I go to the site(s):
> > >
> > > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and
> > > testing anything - just looking at what I see:
> > >
> > > 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
> > > 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on
> > > this page.
> > > 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
> > >
> > > Then I go to here -
> > > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a
> > > slightly different picture:
> > >
> > > 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy
> > > after it was moved over.
> > > -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
> > > 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that
> > > first page.
> > >
> > > Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super
> > > important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
> > >
> > > 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
> > > 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
> > >
> > > I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've
> > > sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.
> > > Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure
> > > you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other
> > > options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF,
> > > so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are
> > > more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as
> > > well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Ruppert
> > >
> > > On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> > >
> > >> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to
> > >> know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
> > >>
> > >> -Adrian
> > >>
> > >> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> > >>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing
> > >>> keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new
> > >>> users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their
> > >>> browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>> Ruth
> > >>> ----------------------------------------------------
> > >>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> > >>> "myofbiz"
> > >>> [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
> --
> Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
> RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.
>
>

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Adrian Crum wrote:

> --- On Fri, 2/5/10, Ruth Hoffman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> I'd also like to have a seat on the project's oversight
>> group.
>>    
>
>  
> Apache OFBiz is based on meritocracy - there is no oversight group. We are all peers and volunteers.
>
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#meritocracy
>
>  

Except when it comes to updating the website or adding code to the code
base. Now, why do I need to be a Java developer to maintain the website?
>  
>> I don't understand how a project of this magnitude
>> can continue to grow and prosper without business oriented
>> people helping to guide it.
>>    
>
> There are business oriented people guiding it. Many of the committers are or have been business owners.
>
>  
Really? I hope they don't run their businesses the same way they run the
project.
>> There is so much more to making software
>> successful than anything clever "foxes" will ever have time
>> to consider.
>>    
>
> You make it sound as though you have some special insight no one else has. If you feel the project can benefit from your insight, then it would help if you made meaningful contributions in the form of software patches - instead of busying yourself with writing hyperbole.
>
>  
Well, Adrian perhaps I do have some insight. BTW, I have made several
patch and other contributions in the past.
> -Adrian
>
>
>
>      
>
>  

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Hi Matt:
Thanks for your input. I'm always open to rebuke.

I take issue with one thing you said: "The primary business is always
developing the system". IMO, "developing the system" does not always
mean adding code to the project at the expense of some very basic
business related tasks. Committers on this project, are always being
taken to task for not tying up loose ends (my reference to how Java code
is formatted, for example). Why shouldn't the project be held
responsible for work effort around the infrastructure. This is like
saying that as a committer, you only need take responsibility's for
those things that you choose to care about.

I wish I could fix this. Heaven knows I've tried but I'm not a
committer. I've been through this with the project "foxes" several times
already.  And here's my point: IMO, It is the project's "main" job to
see that things are put in place to preserve the project. And maybe that
is where we all differ. I say if you are a committer, then you need to
take full responsibility for the project and not just those things you
find "interesting" or "exciting".

We have gone from "foxes" guarding the chicken coop to no one guarding
the chicken coop. I'm not rolling my eyes anymore. I'm just smiling
because now there is more opportunity for me to help people figure out
how to use OFBiz. Just hope they don't get too scared away before they
find me on the web.

Just my 2 cents.

Regards,
Ruth

Matt Warnock wrote:

> My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
> broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
> store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
> we go along.  
>
> The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
> demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
> chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
> changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
> little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
> underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
> what the problem is?
>
> Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
> download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
> as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
> them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
> broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
> opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
> important in that newbies see them first.
>
>
> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>  
>> Hi Jacques:
>> That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
>>
>> My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major
>> regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about
>> it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the
>> second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash
>> page.
>>
>> It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind
>> would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A
>> prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that
>> maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some
>> other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot
>> pole.
>>
>> Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code,
>> because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then,
>> well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a
>> clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable
>> enough for my tastes.
>>
>> And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I
>> for one am pretty sure I know why.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ruth
>>
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>    
>>> Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for
>>> instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
>>> We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance,
>>> some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure
>>> but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other
>>> SEs) knows about it...
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
>>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message -
>>> so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude,
>>> I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us
>>> help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see
>>> when I go to the site(s):
>>>
>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and
>>> testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>>>
>>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on
>>> this page.
>>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>>>
>>> Then I go to here -
>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a
>>> slightly different picture:
>>>
>>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy
>>> after it was moved over.
>>> -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that
>>> first page.
>>>
>>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super
>>> important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>>>
>>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>>>
>>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've
>>> sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  
>>> Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure
>>> you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other
>>> options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF,
>>> so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are
>>> more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as
>>> well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>>
>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to
>>>> know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>>>>
>>>> -Adrian
>>>>
>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>        
>>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing
>>>>> keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new
>>>>> users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their
>>>>> browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>          
>>>
>>>      
>
>
>  

[Matt Warnock]

Speaking as a newbie, I have downloaded nightly builds, but never
anything other than the most recent one.  I would think that an
explanation of the differences between 4.0, 9.4, and trunk, together
with notes on how to keep current in each, would be good info for the
front page.  A link to a separate page of past versions (mostly for
historical interest) might be merited under those, but I can't see any
earthly reason for links to 10 nightly builds for each version on page
1.  Just creates confusion, IMHO.


On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 22:09 +0000, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Are nightly builds actually used?
>
> Anyone who already does ofbiz development would want to use svn?
>
> Anyone new to ofbiz would only want ofbiz-rel9.04-current.zip or
> ofbiz-trunk-current.zip?
>
> Just curious...
>
> Tim Ruppert wrote:
> > Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message - so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude, I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us help infra to try to meet what you're looking for.  Here's what I see when I go to the site(s):
> >
> > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and testing anything - just looking at what I see:
> >
> > 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
> > 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on this page.
> > 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
> >
> > Then I go to here - http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a slightly different picture:
> >
> > 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy after it was moved over.
> > -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
> > 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that first page.
> >
> > Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
> >
> > 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
> > 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
> >
> > I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF, so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ruppert
> >
> > On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> >
> >  
> >> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
> >>
> >> -Adrian
> >>
> >> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>    
> >>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Ruth
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
> >>> [hidden email]
> >>>      
> >
> >  

--
Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.

[Chris Snow-3]

That was exactly my thinking Matt.   The current nightly build page is
more likely to scare newbies away IMHO.  Your idea below would be much
more helpful to new users.

Matt Warnock wrote:

> Speaking as a newbie, I have downloaded nightly builds, but never
> anything other than the most recent one.  I would think that an
> explanation of the differences between 4.0, 9.4, and trunk, together
> with notes on how to keep current in each, would be good info for the
> front page.  A link to a separate page of past versions (mostly for
> historical interest) might be merited under those, but I can't see any
> earthly reason for links to 10 nightly builds for each version on page
> 1.  Just creates confusion, IMHO.
>
>
> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 22:09 +0000, Christopher Snow wrote:
>  
>> Are nightly builds actually used?
>>
>> Anyone who already does ofbiz development would want to use svn?
>>
>> Anyone new to ofbiz would only want ofbiz-rel9.04-current.zip or
>> ofbiz-trunk-current.zip?
>>
>> Just curious...
>>
>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>    
>>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message - so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude, I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us help infra to try to meet what you're looking for.  Here's what I see when I go to the site(s):
>>>
>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>>>
>>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on this page.
>>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>>>
>>> Then I go to here - http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a slightly different picture:
>>>
>>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy after it was moved over.
>>> -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that first page.
>>>
>>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>>>
>>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>>>
>>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF, so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ruppert
>>>
>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>>>>
>>>> -Adrian
>>>>
>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>  
>>>      
>
>
>  

[Adrian Crum-2]

--- On Fri, 2/5/10, Ruth Hoffman <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I say if you are a committer, then you
> need to take full responsibility for the project and not
> just those things you find "interesting" or "exciting".

Here again you are misunderstanding open source software. OFBiz is a community of volunteers. Who is to say they are to take full responsibility for the project? Who put you in charge to say that?

I've been involved with OFBiz for 6 years, and I've seen discussions like this before - people with self-proclaimed superiority start out complaining about the project, but have nothing meaningful to contribute. When asked to provide patches to back up their claims, they disappear or make excuses.

The bottom line is, you can talk all you want about how great you are at what you do, but until you actually provide work to back up your claims, your talk is just wasted bandwidth.

-Adrian



     

[David E. Jones-2]

Plenty of PMC members, committers, and contributors still manage to do just that...

-David


On Feb 5, 2010, at 1:31 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:

> You're definitely right about that :)
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
>> Actually, I take that back. If I'm part of the committer's  group, I won't be able to "whine" and "troll" from the comfort of my desktop anymore.
>

[David E. Jones-2]

On Feb 5, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> I'd also like to have a seat on the project's oversight group. I don't understand how a project of this magnitude can continue to grow and prosper without business oriented people helping to guide it. The oversight group (whoever they happen to be) is like a bunch of very clever "foxes" guarding the "chicken coop". (Where the "chicken coop" is the code base.) There is so much more to making software successful than anything clever "foxes" will ever have time to consider.

Ruth,

If you'd like it, you'll have to earn it, and that is done by contributing.

Perhaps the PMC has overlooked your contributions that merit your invitation. If so, please send a message to [hidden email] and explain your position.

And yes, there are many ways to contribute that don't involve code.

On the other hand, what sort of "power" do you think you'll have once you are a PMC member? What do you think you'll be able to do that you can't do now?

-David

[David E. Jones-2]

On Feb 5, 2010, at 3:03 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:

> --- On Fri, 2/5/10, Ruth Hoffman <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> There is so much more to making software
>> successful than anything clever "foxes" will ever have time
>> to consider.
>
> You make it sound as though you have some special insight no one else has. If you feel the project can benefit from your insight, then it would help if you made meaningful contributions in the form of software patches - instead of busying yourself with writing hyperbole.

Contributions certainly do not have to be software patches.

Non-developers are needed and can contribute to gathering and document requirements, producing designs, and then collaborating with others to get them built. Feedback on current functionality is especially helpful if there is a documented business context to help define how it should be (aka "requirements"). There is also a great need for documentation of existing features, public relations and marketing efforts, business development (different from traditional business development, but building "partnerships" of a sort still applies to projects like OFBiz), lobbying in government and large organizations and industry associations and so on, organizing and facilitating volunteer efforts (doing so effectively is not easy), and many other things.

In fact, I think perhaps the list of possible contributions that don't involve development are larger at this point than those that do involve development. With a little creativity there is always something to do, and with OFBiz there are SO many untapped opportunities.

For a more specific example, if someone wanted to build their network and help build OFBiz at the same time they could start gathering stories and testimonials of end-user organizations and of service provider organizations (even starting with the public/voluntary lists on the wiki), and then organize and publish them. It has been a long time since anything like this has been done, and the stories available now are far better than then... so the field is "white" and certainly ready for harvest.

Even building a business that uses OFBiz, or even better one that helps others use OFBiz, helps the project. However, that's not really a direct contribution that helps the project and it wouldn't really be considered a "contribution" per-se.

-David

[David E. Jones-2]

On Feb 5, 2010, at 3:24 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> One feeling I have though, PHBs are often pushing this way, note that I did not say that you are a PHB :p
> Actually, I agree with you about "our" lack of interest for end user. I think this is due to the nature of OFBiz itself...

I won't agree there is any lack of interest for end-users. In fact, nearly everything in OFBiz is the result of some end-user or other requesting functionality and being willing to sponsor its creation and contribution back to the project.

However, end-users have different interests than vendors, so one should not expect the same results of end-user driven efforts as of vendor-driven efforts.

-David

[Tim Ruppert]

Yes they do ... :)

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Feb 5, 2010, at 5:18 PM, David E Jones wrote:

>
> Plenty of PMC members, committers, and contributors still manage to do just that...
>
> -David
>
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 1:31 PM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> You're definitely right about that :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>>
>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>> Actually, I take that back. If I'm part of the committer's  group, I won't be able to "whine" and "troll" from the comfort of my desktop anymore.
>>
>

[David E. Jones-2]

On Feb 5, 2010, at 4:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> Hi Matt:
> Thanks for your input. I'm always open to rebuke.
>
> I take issue with one thing you said: "The primary business is always developing the system". IMO, "developing the system" does not always mean adding code to the project at the expense of some very basic business related tasks. Committers on this project, are always being taken to task for not tying up loose ends (my reference to how Java code is formatted, for example). Why shouldn't the project be held responsible for work effort around the infrastructure. This is like saying that as a committer, you only need take responsibility's for those things that you choose to care about.

Ummm... what are you getting at here? Of course committers only take responsibility for the things they care about.

Are you hoping for some means to force volunteers to do something? What exactly would that look like?

On the other hand, is your hope to scare away volunteers by saying that the more you contribute the more you are obligated to contribute?

If sarcasm is easier for you to understand, here it comes: Wow, what a sweet deal! Where can I sign up?!? Can I do it now?!? Can I do it now?!?

Oh, I know... maybe if you attack and insult people enough THAT will get them to do what you want.

Here's a reality check for you: we're people and volunteers, NOT slaves or even employees.

> I wish I could fix this. Heaven knows I've tried but I'm not a committer. I've been through this with the project "foxes" several times already.  And here's my point: IMO, It is the project's "main" job to see that things are put in place to preserve the project. And maybe that is where we all differ. I say if you are a committer, then you need to take full responsibility for the project and not just those things you find "interesting" or "exciting".

You've tried? By doing what? Also, how would being a committer help you to fix this? I've seen no effort on your part except building a self-serving business instead of participating in the community, and spending a few minutes here and there to attack and insult people who have contributed voluntarily.

If that's what you think will make a change here, or anywhere, then there is a huge gap between your understanding of reality and its true nature.

You clearly don't understand how things work here, how to get things done here, and I'd even go so far as to say that your understanding of people and motivations is far separated from reality.

-David

> We have gone from "foxes" guarding the chicken coop to no one guarding the chicken coop. I'm not rolling my eyes anymore. I'm just smiling because now there is more opportunity for me to help people figure out how to use OFBiz. Just hope they don't get too scared away before they find me on the web.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Regards,
> Ruth
>
> Matt Warnock wrote:
>> My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
>> broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
>> store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
>> we go along.  
>> The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
>> demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
>> chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
>> changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
>> little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
>> underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
>> what the problem is?
>> Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
>> download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
>> as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
>> them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
>> broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
>> opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
>> important in that newbies see them first.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>  
>>> Hi Jacques:
>>> That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
>>>
>>> My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash page.
>>>
>>> It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
>>>
>>> Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code, because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then, well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable enough for my tastes.
>>>
>>> And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I for one am pretty sure I know why.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ruth
>>>
>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
>>>> We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance, some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other SEs) knows about it...
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>> From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
>>>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message - so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude, I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see when I go to the site(s):
>>>>
>>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>>>>
>>>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on this page.
>>>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>>>>
>>>> Then I go to here - http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a slightly different picture:
>>>>
>>>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy after it was moved over.
>>>> -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that first page.
>>>>
>>>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>>>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>>>>
>>>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF, so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>
>>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>        
>>>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>          
>>>>
>>>>      
>>
>>
>>  

[Tim Ruppert]

Well - I think what we went thru was the difference between targeting the trunk and targeting the release branch - and we do still differ there in a big way - so that's not what I want to talk about.  What I'm looking for are actual examples and thought put in to _how_ I can help design and bring to fruition the type of snapshot website that you would be stoked about.  As I said earlier, even examples of someone else doing it really well is out there.  What you've written below is really general and doesn't make much sense to me

>>> I'd like to have a download site where any user, especially a new user, could visit, feel comfortable about the project (and life in general), and then proceed about the business of downloading code. Easy, simple and painless.

I'm down to spend my time and my companies time in marketing OFBiz - (I think I've proven that) - but I'd like a little guidance - at least in this discussion - towards an example of doing it right.

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Feb 5, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> Hi Tim:
> I'm a little surprised. I thought we went through this a while back (maybe a few months ago) and the answer was: "the site is targeted at project committers". I left that discussion with the impression that was the last word. Are you saying that you might be open to discussing this again?
> Regards,
> Ruth
>
> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>> Thanks for the feedback.  I'm going to think on it this weekend and will try and come up with some ideas of how this could work better.  If you could show me some sites that you do like, that would be a big help - then I can see how to get that working in our world.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ruppert
>>
>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Hi Tim:
>>> Since you asked:
>>>
>>> I'd like to have a download site where any user, especially a new user, could visit, feel comfortable about the project (and life in general), and then proceed about the business of downloading code. Easy, simple and painless. Yes, the nightly builds are a HUGE step in that direction. Thanks again to everyone who makes this possible. But, lets put that in perspective: That only makes the process of downloading easier.
>>>
>>> I'd also like to have a seat on the project's oversight group. I don't understand how a project of this magnitude can continue to grow and prosper without business oriented people helping to guide it. The oversight group (whoever they happen to be) is like a bunch of very clever "foxes" guarding the "chicken coop". (Where the "chicken coop" is the code base.) There is so much more to making software successful than anything clever "foxes" will ever have time to consider.
>>>
>>> Actually, I take that back. If I'm part of the committer's  group, I won't be able to "whine" and "troll" from the comfort of my desktop anymore.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ruth
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Thanks - again that was super helpful.  I took the time to lay it out like a towel what was there, what looks to be broken when we migrated to the ASF infra and no you wont' go thru it?  There are some obvious spots for you to say something or point to projects you like, but you just continue to roll your eyes.  I didn't push for or want this move to the ASF infra - but I'm still trying to help here.
>>>>
>>>> What else do you want here Ruth?  Cheers,
>>>> Ruppert
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>> Hi Tim:
>>>>> I've been through this already. Several times over.
>>>>>
>>>>> All I can say at this point is, no one is minding the store. I just don't get it: You guys spend hours agonizing over how and where to put spaces in Java files, yet you can't see the most obvious flaws in how OFBiz does business.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh well...
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message - so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude, I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us help infra to try to meet what you're looking for.  Here's what I see when I go to the site(s):
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>>>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on this page.
>>>>>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then I go to here - http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a slightly different picture:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy after it was moved over. -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>>>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that first page.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>>>>>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF, so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                
>>>>>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>>                            
>>>>>>                
>>>>      
>>
>>  

[Matt Warnock]

On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 17:12 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> Hi Matt:
> Thanks for your input. I'm always open to rebuke.

Wasn't intended as rebuke, just (hopefully) helpful observation.  We all
can use those, I think.

> I take issue with one thing you said: "The primary business is always
> developing the system". IMO, "developing the system" does not always
> mean adding code to the project at the expense of some very basic
> business related tasks. Committers on this project, are always being
> taken to task for not tying up loose ends (my reference to how Java code
> is formatted, for example). Why shouldn't the project be held
> responsible for work effort around the infrastructure. This is like
> saying that as a committer, you only need take responsibility's for
> those things that you choose to care about.

Ah, but that's just it-- You can't "hold people responsible" in a
volunteer organization.  What ya gonna do, fire 'em?  In an ideal world,
a volunteer would do the whole job, not just their favorite parts.  We'd
get good code AND good documentation.  But in the Real World(TM), skills
differ.  Though I CAN do both, I am a much better writer than a coder,
and I have the good sense to know it.  And as a newbie, I am too low on
the learning curve to do much more than make (hopefully) helpful
suggestions as I fight my way through.  And as an old French saying
goes, "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar".  If you want
to catch flies, that is. :)

> I wish I could fix this. Heaven knows I've tried but I'm not a
> committer. I've been through this with the project "foxes" several times
> already.  And here's my point: IMO, It is the project's "main" job to
> see that things are put in place to preserve the project. And maybe that
> is where we all differ. I say if you are a committer, then you need to
> take full responsibility for the project and not just those things you
> find "interesting" or "exciting".

In "The Mythical Man-Month", I think, the author said that managing
programmers was like trying to herd cats.  Managing volunteer
programmers, then, is like trying to herd birds.  Not only are they
(like cats) not herd animals, but they are not even limited to our
herding plane, and since we don't pay them, they are in no way subject
to our will.  So if you want to "fix this", all I can say is, good luck
with that.  Being a committer won't help.  But we can still feed the
birds, and enjoy their products, and hopefully not be the statues on
which they perch. :)  (No analogy is perfect.)

> We have gone from "foxes" guarding the chicken coop to no one guarding
> the chicken coop. I'm not rolling my eyes anymore. I'm just smiling
> because now there is more opportunity for me to help people figure out
> how to use OFBiz. Just hope they don't get too scared away before they
> find me on the web.

Not sure who the "foxes" are, or how they relate to the chicken coop
(back to birds again).  I doubt anyone wants to hurt OFBiz, they just
have different views of what is the *MOST* important thing that *THEY*
can do right *NOW* to advance it.  That is both natural and healthy, and
the reason that, over time, free enterprise almost always works better
than planned economies.  

Your "best" or "easiest" solution will not be mine and vice versa, and
one size never fits all perfectly, but one may be a better approximation
than another in a particular case, or even for most cases.  Reasonable
minds can and do differ and even disagree.  

And so I propose Warnock's Razor (a corollary to Hanlon's): "Never
ascribe to ignorance or stupidity that which is adequately explained by
a different life experience and point of view".  Or to put it more
succinctly: "Counterview before Cock-up".  And in FOSS, that is even
more true-- everyone scratches their own itch first.

I agree with you that there is a problem here in the OFBiz community,
but I think it is cultural, not technical or administrative.  I think
there needs to be more grateful abundance (less scarcity) mentality,
more positive (less negative) energy, and more volunteerism (less
criticism). But (I hope) this feeling is more than just me saying "Can't
we all just get along."

More importantly, I think a change in the collective vision can put more
money in all our pockets.  This can be accomplished by focusing more
energy on reducing, where possible, the learning curve, so that more
people can get more real work done faster, thus freeing us all from the
limits of 80/20 rule.

Silverston posits, I think correctly, that 80% of all businesses
operations are generally the same, being more or less "standard" or
non-unique aspects of business in general.  That standard 80% is NOT
what generates the real profits.  Using the 80/20 rule, that standard
80% of the business generates only 20% of the profits, while the other
20% (the unique part) drives 80% of the profits.  As a business person,
I can't afford to ignore the standard 80% (like accounting or tax
returns) but those usually don't give me any competitive advantage.  But
OFBiz might possibly change all that.

If I could sit down with OFBiz and get it up and running on the easy and
standard 80% of my business with minimal effort and no cost, I would
have a lot more free time for the unique 20% of my business.  That free
time would in turn 1) increase my appreciation for what I have been
given, increasing my desire to "pay it forward", and 2) allow me time
(and money) to work on developing OFBiz for the other unique 20% that is
*more* critical to my business, and more impact to my bottom line.
Though my inclination would be to contribute that code, a scarcity
mentality or competitive considerations might well keep me from doing
it.  But at the same time, I might well also refine non-competitive
elements of the "standard" 80%, which I would be even more likely to
contribute back, improving it for everybody.  

As an OFBiz programmer or VAR, I would want that 80% to be as easy and
solid as possible, so that it brought the maximum number of possible
customers into the fold.  That makes customer acquisition easy (a very
expensive part of any business, and the keystone of so-called "viral"
marketing).  Once they are in, each customer will want to customize
their unique 20%, knowing that it will benefit from tight integration
with the best practices in the 80% that they already have.  That makes
for a good prospect for a solid revenue stream from each new happy
customer, though probably not right out of the chute.  

But by contrast, what happens if the 80% is hard? Then, as Ruth rightly
points out, they run away, but in that scenario NOBODY wins (not even
the educator or customizer, sorry Ruth).  The community is smaller, the
dollars are smaller, the customers are already in scarcity mode because
of the upfront costs, the programmers are continuously reimplementing
the same customizations (boring), and their customers are worried about
whether they will ever recoup the customization phase and whether it
will ever really pay off.  Unfortunately, this is more like what I think
is happening today, not only in OFBiz, but in ERP generally (look at
PeopleSoft or SAP, and their customer satisfaction rates).

If this project is Asterisk, it needs FreePBX.  If it is Debian, it
needs Ubuntu.  If it is Linux, it needs SLS/Slackware and the GNU
utilities (now I'm really showing my age).  It needs a standard
distribution that can be up and running usefully very quickly, and then
customized later.  

IMHO, we have the cart before the horse a bit, and I sense that David
and others are getting a little bit of burnout from trying to push that
horse uphill.  Get the horse out in front, and it might be a bit easier
(and more economically rewarding) for everyone.

>
> Just my 2 cents.

Likewise.  Just some early impressions.  I hope these ideas will
generate some discussion, though.

>
> Regards,
> Ruth
>
> Matt Warnock wrote:
> > My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
> > broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
> > store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
> > we go along.  
> >
> > The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
> > demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
> > chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
> > changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
> > little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
> > underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
> > what the problem is?
> >
> > Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
> > download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
> > as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
> > them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
> > broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
> > opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
> > important in that newbies see them first.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >  
> >> Hi Jacques:
> >> That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
> >>
> >> My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major
> >> regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about
> >> it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the
> >> second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash
> >> page.
> >>
> >> It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind
> >> would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A
> >> prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that
> >> maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some
> >> other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot
> >> pole.
> >>
> >> Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code,
> >> because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then,
> >> well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a
> >> clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable
> >> enough for my tastes.
> >>
> >> And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I
> >> for one am pretty sure I know why.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Ruth
> >>
> >> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>    
> >>> Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for
> >>> instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
> >>> We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance,
> >>> some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure
> >>> but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other
> >>> SEs) knows about it...
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >>> From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
> >>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message -
> >>> so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude,
> >>> I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us
> >>> help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see
> >>> when I go to the site(s):
> >>>
> >>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and
> >>> testing anything - just looking at what I see:
> >>>
> >>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
> >>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on
> >>> this page.
> >>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
> >>>
> >>> Then I go to here -
> >>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a
> >>> slightly different picture:
> >>>
> >>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy
> >>> after it was moved over.
> >>> -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
> >>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that
> >>> first page.
> >>>
> >>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super
> >>> important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
> >>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
> >>>
> >>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've
> >>> sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  
> >>> Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure
> >>> you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other
> >>> options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF,
> >>> so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are
> >>> more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as
> >>> well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Ruppert
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to
> >>>> know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Adrian
> >>>>
> >>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>>>        
> >>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing
> >>>>> keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new
> >>>>> users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their
> >>>>> browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Ruth
> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> >>>>> "myofbiz"
> >>>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>>          
> >>>
> >>>      
> >
> >
> >  

--
Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Hi Matt:
Obviously, I don't have a life... ;-)

Matt Warnock wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 17:12 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>  
>> Hi Matt:
>> Thanks for your input. I'm always open to rebuke.
>>    
>
> Wasn't intended as rebuke, just (hopefully) helpful observation.  We all
> can use those, I think.
>
>  
>> I take issue with one thing you said: "The primary business is always
>> developing the system". IMO, "developing the system" does not always
>> mean adding code to the project at the expense of some very basic
>> business related tasks. Committers on this project, are always being
>> taken to task for not tying up loose ends (my reference to how Java code
>> is formatted, for example). Why shouldn't the project be held
>> responsible for work effort around the infrastructure. This is like
>> saying that as a committer, you only need take responsibility's for
>> those things that you choose to care about.
>>    
>
> Ah, but that's just it-- You can't "hold people responsible" in a
> volunteer organization.  What ya gonna do, fire 'em?  In an ideal world,
> a volunteer would do the whole job, not just their favorite parts.  We'd
> get good code AND good documentation.  But in the Real World(TM), skills
> differ.  Though I CAN do both, I am a much better writer than a coder,
> and I have the good sense to know it.  And as a newbie, I am too low on
> the learning curve to do much more than make (hopefully) helpful
> suggestions as I fight my way through.  And as an old French saying
> goes, "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar".  If you want
> to catch flies, that is. :)
>
>  

I beg to differ. People get fired from volunteer positions all the time.
Many times they are "asked" to leave because their behavior does not
coincide with that of the organization for which they have volunteered.
My basic philosophy about volunteering goes back to something I once
read about there being no such thing as "altruism". Everyone has a
hidden agenda including the volunteers on this project. And if that
agenda does not fit nicely with the health and well being of the
project? Just an observation.

>> I wish I could fix this. Heaven knows I've tried but I'm not a
>> committer. I've been through this with the project "foxes" several times
>> already.  And here's my point: IMO, It is the project's "main" job to
>> see that things are put in place to preserve the project. And maybe that
>> is where we all differ. I say if you are a committer, then you need to
>> take full responsibility for the project and not just those things you
>> find "interesting" or "exciting".
>>    
>
> In "The Mythical Man-Month", I think, the author said that managing
> programmers was like trying to herd cats.  Managing volunteer
> programmers, then, is like trying to herd birds.  Not only are they
> (like cats) not herd animals, but they are not even limited to our
> herding plane, and since we don't pay them, they are in no way subject
> to our will.  So if you want to "fix this", all I can say is, good luck
> with that.  Being a committer won't help.  But we can still feed the
> birds, and enjoy their products, and hopefully not be the statues on
> which they perch. :)  (No analogy is perfect.)
>
>  

Actually, from experience I can tell you that herding some birds -
chickens - can be done. It starts by socializing them at an early age
and getting them use to human contact. Maybe some of these developers
need some socialization?  And you know what, I bet that if you really
look closely, there aren't too many volunteers on this project that
don't have someone else footing the bill for their volunteer work.
Nothing wrong with that, but let us be clear about who is paying for
what here. The volunteer effort is not as "pure" as some would have us
believe.

>> We have gone from "foxes" guarding the chicken coop to no one guarding
>> the chicken coop. I'm not rolling my eyes anymore. I'm just smiling
>> because now there is more opportunity for me to help people figure out
>> how to use OFBiz. Just hope they don't get too scared away before they
>> find me on the web.
>>    
>
> Not sure who the "foxes" are, or how they relate to the chicken coop
> (back to birds again).  I doubt anyone wants to hurt OFBiz, they just
> have different views of what is the *MOST* important thing that *THEY*
> can do right *NOW* to advance it.  That is both natural and healthy, and
> the reason that, over time, free enterprise almost always works better
> than planned economies.  
>
> Your "best" or "easiest" solution will not be mine and vice versa, and
> one size never fits all perfectly, but one may be a better approximation
> than another in a particular case, or even for most cases.  Reasonable
> minds can and do differ and even disagree.  
>
> And so I propose Warnock's Razor (a corollary to Hanlon's): "Never
> ascribe to ignorance or stupidity that which is adequately explained by
> a different life experience and point of view".  Or to put it more
> succinctly: "Counterview before Cock-up".  And in FOSS, that is even
> more true-- everyone scratches their own itch first.
>
>  

Ok, that sounds like a plan. I will continue to scratch my own itch
first and the peck violently (to use the bird analogy) at what I think
needs attention.
> I agree with you that there is a problem here in the OFBiz community,
> but I think it is cultural, not technical or administrative.  I think
> there needs to be more grateful abundance (less scarcity) mentality,
> more positive (less negative) energy, and more volunteerism (less
> criticism). But (I hope) this feeling is more than just me saying "Can't
> we all just get along."
>
>  
It is cultural. No doubt about it.
I don't think you will find anyone more positive about OFBiz than I am.
That is why I take the time to repeatedly point out the same very basic
things. BTW, I in no way confuse OFBiz with the project volunteers.
OFBiz, in my mind still has no rival.

> More importantly, I think a change in the collective vision can put more
> money in all our pockets.  This can be accomplished by focusing more
> energy on reducing, where possible, the learning curve, so that more
> people can get more real work done faster, thus freeing us all from the
> limits of 80/20 rule.
>
> Silverston posits, I think correctly, that 80% of all businesses
> operations are generally the same, being more or less "standard" or
> non-unique aspects of business in general.  That standard 80% is NOT
> what generates the real profits.  Using the 80/20 rule, that standard
> 80% of the business generates only 20% of the profits, while the other
> 20% (the unique part) drives 80% of the profits.  As a business person,
> I can't afford to ignore the standard 80% (like accounting or tax
> returns) but those usually don't give me any competitive advantage.  But
> OFBiz might possibly change all that.
>
> If I could sit down with OFBiz and get it up and running on the easy and
> standard 80% of my business with minimal effort and no cost, I would
> have a lot more free time for the unique 20% of my business.  That free
> time would in turn 1) increase my appreciation for what I have been
> given, increasing my desire to "pay it forward", and 2) allow me time
> (and money) to work on developing OFBiz for the other unique 20% that is
> *more* critical to my business, and more impact to my bottom line.
> Though my inclination would be to contribute that code, a scarcity
> mentality or competitive considerations might well keep me from doing
> it.  But at the same time, I might well also refine non-competitive
> elements of the "standard" 80%, which I would be even more likely to
> contribute back, improving it for everybody.  
>
>  

IMO, the issue here is not giving back code. There is plenty of that.
The issue is growing mind share. The more users, the more likely the
code base and project will live to see another day. Every new user
should be celebrated. Embraced. Listened to and actively sought out.

> As an OFBiz programmer or VAR, I would want that 80% to be as easy and
> solid as possible, so that it brought the maximum number of possible
> customers into the fold.  That makes customer acquisition easy (a very
> expensive part of any business, and the keystone of so-called "viral"
> marketing).  Once they are in, each customer will want to customize
> their unique 20%, knowing that it will benefit from tight integration
> with the best practices in the 80% that they already have.  That makes
> for a good prospect for a solid revenue stream from each new happy
> customer, though probably not right out of the chute.  
>
> But by contrast, what happens if the 80% is hard? Then, as Ruth rightly
> points out, they run away, but in that scenario NOBODY wins (not even
> the educator or customizer, sorry Ruth).  The community is smaller, the
> dollars are smaller, the customers are already in scarcity mode because
> of the upfront costs, the programmers are continuously reimplementing
> the same customizations (boring), and their customers are worried about
> whether they will ever recoup the customization phase and whether it
> will ever really pay off.  Unfortunately, this is more like what I think
> is happening today, not only in OFBiz, but in ERP generally (look at
> PeopleSoft or SAP, and their customer satisfaction rates).
>
>  

Exactly. The difference is, SAP, PeopleSoft and all the other big names
have mind share. They acquired that mind share through extensive
marketing and developing relationships with their customers, one at a time.
> If this project is Asterisk, it needs FreePBX.  If it is Debian, it
> needs Ubuntu.  If it is Linux, it needs SLS/Slackware and the GNU
> utilities (now I'm really showing my age).  It needs a standard
> distribution that can be up and running usefully very quickly, and then
> customized later.  
>
>  
Yes! And IMHO that is exactly what the OFBiz ecommerce demo was. And it
could be again. It was (back in the 4.0 days) a huge selling point. I
used it many times to demonstrate the power behind OFBiz. Why someone
saw fit to "fix" it when it wasn't broken, who knows. I guess it is just
the developer in all of us that can't leave well enough alone.

> IMHO, we have the cart before the horse a bit, and I sense that David
> and others are getting a little bit of burnout from trying to push that
> horse uphill.  Get the horse out in front, and it might be a bit easier
> (and more economically rewarding) for everyone.
>
>  
>> Just my 2 cents.
>>    
>
> Likewise.  Just some early impressions.  I hope these ideas will
> generate some discussion, though.
>
>  
>> Regards,
>> Ruth
>>
>> Matt Warnock wrote:
>>    
>>> My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
>>> broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
>>> store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
>>> we go along.  
>>>
>>> The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
>>> demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
>>> chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
>>> changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
>>> little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
>>> underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
>>> what the problem is?
>>>
>>> Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
>>> download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
>>> as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
>>> them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
>>> broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
>>> opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
>>> important in that newbies see them first.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> Hi Jacques:
>>>> That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
>>>>
>>>> My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major
>>>> regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about
>>>> it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the
>>>> second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash
>>>> page.
>>>>
>>>> It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind
>>>> would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A
>>>> prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that
>>>> maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some
>>>> other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot
>>>> pole.
>>>>
>>>> Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code,
>>>> because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then,
>>>> well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a
>>>> clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable
>>>> enough for my tastes.
>>>>
>>>> And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I
>>>> for one am pretty sure I know why.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Ruth
>>>>
>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>>> Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for
>>>>> instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
>>>>> We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance,
>>>>> some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure
>>>>> but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other
>>>>> SEs) knows about it...
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
>>>>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message -
>>>>> so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude,
>>>>> I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us
>>>>> help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see
>>>>> when I go to the site(s):
>>>>>
>>>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and
>>>>> testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on
>>>>> this page.
>>>>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then I go to here -
>>>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a
>>>>> slightly different picture:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy
>>>>> after it was moved over.
>>>>> -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that
>>>>> first page.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super
>>>>> important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>>>>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've
>>>>> sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  
>>>>> Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure
>>>>> you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other
>>>>> options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF,
>>>>> so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are
>>>>> more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as
>>>>> well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ruppert
>>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to
>>>>>> know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Adrian
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>        
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing
>>>>>>> keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new
>>>>>>> users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their
>>>>>>> browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>  
>>>      
>
>
>  

[Matt Warnock]

I've always thought the perl Mason site was pretty good.  Simple, clean,
easy to find stuff.  A little intro on the front page, and well
organized, easy to find links to the various areas.

http://www.masonhq.com/

On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 18:21 -0700, Tim Ruppert wrote:

> Well - I think what we went thru was the difference between targeting the trunk and targeting the release branch - and we do still differ there in a big way - so that's not what I want to talk about.  What I'm looking for are actual examples and thought put in to _how_ I can help design and bring to fruition the type of snapshot website that you would be stoked about.  As I said earlier, even examples of someone else doing it really well is out there.  What you've written below is really general and doesn't make much sense to me
>
> >>> I'd like to have a download site where any user, especially a new user, could visit, feel comfortable about the project (and life in general), and then proceed about the business of downloading code. Easy, simple and painless.
>
> I'm down to spend my time and my companies time in marketing OFBiz - (I think I've proven that) - but I'd like a little guidance - at least in this discussion - towards an example of doing it right.
>
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
>
> On Feb 5, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
> > Hi Tim:
> > I'm a little surprised. I thought we went through this a while back (maybe a few months ago) and the answer was: "the site is targeted at project committers". I left that discussion with the impression that was the last word. Are you saying that you might be open to discussing this again?
> > Regards,
> > Ruth
> >
> > Tim Ruppert wrote:
> >> Thanks for the feedback.  I'm going to think on it this weekend and will try and come up with some ideas of how this could work better.  If you could show me some sites that you do like, that would be a big help - then I can see how to get that working in our world.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Ruppert
> >>
> >> On Feb 5, 2010, at 12:13 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>
> >>  
> >>> Hi Tim:
> >>> Since you asked:
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to have a download site where any user, especially a new user, could visit, feel comfortable about the project (and life in general), and then proceed about the business of downloading code. Easy, simple and painless. Yes, the nightly builds are a HUGE step in that direction. Thanks again to everyone who makes this possible. But, lets put that in perspective: That only makes the process of downloading easier.
> >>>
> >>> I'd also like to have a seat on the project's oversight group. I don't understand how a project of this magnitude can continue to grow and prosper without business oriented people helping to guide it. The oversight group (whoever they happen to be) is like a bunch of very clever "foxes" guarding the "chicken coop". (Where the "chicken coop" is the code base.) There is so much more to making software successful than anything clever "foxes" will ever have time to consider.
> >>>
> >>> Actually, I take that back. If I'm part of the committer's  group, I won't be able to "whine" and "troll" from the comfort of my desktop anymore.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Ruth
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
> >>>    
> >>>> Thanks - again that was super helpful.  I took the time to lay it out like a towel what was there, what looks to be broken when we migrated to the ASF infra and no you wont' go thru it?  There are some obvious spots for you to say something or point to projects you like, but you just continue to roll your eyes.  I didn't push for or want this move to the ASF infra - but I'm still trying to help here.
> >>>>
> >>>> What else do you want here Ruth?  Cheers,
> >>>> Ruppert
> >>>>
> >>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>      
> >>>>> Hi Tim:
> >>>>> I've been through this already. Several times over.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> All I can say at this point is, no one is minding the store. I just don't get it: You guys spend hours agonizing over how and where to put spaces in Java files, yet you can't see the most obvious flaws in how OFBiz does business.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Oh well...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tim Ruppert wrote:
> >>>>>          
> >>>>>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message - so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude, I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us help infra to try to meet what you're looking for.  Here's what I see when I go to the site(s):
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and testing anything - just looking at what I see:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
> >>>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on this page.
> >>>>>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Then I go to here - http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a slightly different picture:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy after it was moved over. -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
> >>>>>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that first page.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
> >>>>>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF, so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> Ruppert
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>                
> >>>>>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -Adrian
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>>>>>>                      
> >>>>>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
> >>>>>>>> [hidden email]
> >>>>>>>>                            
> >>>>>>                
> >>>>      
> >>
> >>  
>

--
Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.

[Matt Warnock]

On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 18:21 -0700, Tim Ruppert wrote:
> What  I'm looking for are actual examples and thought put in to _how_ I
>  can  help design and bring to fruition the type of snapshot website
>  that  you would be stoked about.  As I said earlier, even examples of
>  someone else doing it really well is out there.  What you've written
>   below is really general and doesn't make much sense to me

I can't look at the snapshot web page separately from the rest.  For me,
the biggest issue is that there is a lot of stuff on the site in several
formats, and it is hard to see where the various parts are, how they
relate to each other, whether they are up to date, and where to start.
Various elements have given me clues, but a 30000-foot overview would be
really nice.  Much of this is that the site is obviously in transition.

For example, most pages come up in a weird default Confluence format
where the top level is in one list and the children are all lumped
together in a second list under "Children". Clicking "view in hierarchy"
puts things in the "normal" outline format, while "hide children" gives
the "collapsed" view.  This seems really awkward compared to the more
conventional collapsible outline view:

[+] This is a collapsed item with hidden children
[-] This item has no hidden children
    [+] This is a collapsed child with children
    [-] This item has no children

Why would you ever want all children lumped in a separate paragraph at
the bottom and separated from their parents?  And especially by default?

If articles or pages are long, with complicated parents and children,
then I'd suggest the Wikipedia convention of an outline at the top, so
you can quickly get to what you want.  I'm not a fan of left-nav,
multicolumn layouts that render weirdly on cell-phones, PDAs, and
netbooks, and never print as expected.

So here is my ideal site map outline (from what I know today, which is
admittedly really limited).  These should NOT all be on the home page,
but the 8 or so top-levels should all be reachable and at least somewhat
described on that page.  Each line probably deserves a page to itself.
Downloads would be at second or third level (about where they are now).

The object here is to get things into a comprehensible order, so that a
new user has a way to get a handle on it and see how the various pieces
fit together.  I'm sure these could be refined and shortened.

What is OFBiz
        ERP basics
        Open Source/Apache License
        Capabilities (as of now)
        Who is using OFBiz, and how
        Websites based on OFBiz (production use)
        OFBiz demo sites
        VAR products (OpenTaps, Neogia, etc)
Getting OFBiz
        System requirements
        OFBiz versions and methods (svn vs http)
        Download current/archives
        Installation (and ./ant target options)
        Customizing
        Updates and upgrades
Using OFBiz
        Manager evaluation/planning manual
        Administrator implementation/operation manual
        User operation manual
        Developer reference manual
        Training videos
        Customizing for industry, best practices
                ecommerce, services, manufacturing, distributing etc
Getting help
        FAQ
        Wiki
        Mailing lists & archives
        IRC channels
        Resources
        Search documentation
Data model background
        Universal data modeling
        Parties and Party Groups, contact info, etc
        Users, authentication and authorization/permissions
        Stores, catalogs, virtual & variant products
        etc
Developing in OFBiz
        Code organization
        Entity engine
        MCV model
        Screen design
        CRUD operations
        Code style guidelines
        Code validation and testing
OFBiz Project
        Credits
        Version history
        Known bugs
        To-do list
        Future plans
OFBiz resources and news
        Recent news
        Websites & blogs
        books, articles, presentations
        Hosting, developers, consultants




--
Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.

[Adrian Crum-2]

--- On Sat, 2/6/10, Matt Warnock <[hidden email]> wrote:

> What is OFBiz
>     ERP basics
>     Open Source/Apache License
>     Capabilities (as of now)
>     Who is using OFBiz, and how
>     Websites based on OFBiz (production
> use)
>     OFBiz demo sites
>     VAR products (OpenTaps, Neogia, etc)
> Getting OFBiz
>     System requirements
>     OFBiz versions and methods (svn vs
> http)
>     Download current/archives
>     Installation (and ./ant target options)
>     Customizing
>     Updates and upgrades
> Using OFBiz
>     Manager evaluation/planning manual
>     Administrator implementation/operation
> manual
>     User operation manual
>     Developer reference manual
>     Training videos
>     Customizing for industry, best
> practices
>         ecommerce, services,
> manufacturing, distributing etc
> Getting help
>     FAQ
>     Wiki
>     Mailing lists & archives
>     IRC channels
>     Resources
>     Search documentation
> Data model background
>     Universal data modeling
>     Parties and Party Groups, contact info,
> etc
>     Users, authentication and
> authorization/permissions
>     Stores, catalogs, virtual & variant
> products
>     etc
> Developing in OFBiz
>     Code organization
>     Entity engine
>     MCV model
>     Screen design
>     CRUD operations
>     Code style guidelines
>     Code validation and testing
> OFBiz Project
>     Credits
>     Version history
>     Known bugs
>     To-do list
>     Future plans
> OFBiz resources and news
>     Recent news
>     Websites & blogs
>     books, articles, presentations
>     Hosting, developers, consultants

This is very close to what I imagined as a good start. There is only one thing I would add:

OFBiz New Users Start Here
    ...

[Jacques Le Roux-2-2]

This is so true (could be a testmonial on the corresponding wiki page, though business level is required ;o),
but to grow faster we must convince PHBs not devs :/

On the other hand  I believe that growing faster is not the right way to think (look at what is happening to our world). Because I
agree with your arguments, I believe that when some other current "competitors" will have disappeared (look at what is happenning to
OS Commerce, if we could see it as a competitor) OFBiz will still be there!


Jacques

From: "Milind Parikh" <[hidden email]>

> ok.. here's my two cents... OfBiz is too complicated for the noobs. Ofbiz is
> an extremely powerful framework. But with power comes responsibility. You
> should be expected to spend 200-400 hours in understanding ofBiz., Anyone
> who has dealt with commercial ERP (some of my "favorite" vendors come to
> mind) would tell you that this is a awesome deal. Let me not even mention
> what the other "vendors" make you go through.
>
> Newbies (as opposed to noobs) will figure it out. ok.. a link is missing
> here and there..so what ? Build a distribution of oFbiz on AWS or something
> and then you won't need to rely on this infrastructure; if that is your pain
> (it certainly is NOT mine).
>
> I believe that ofbiz is much better than the rest of the open source erps.
> It is a lot easier to integrate and has a well thought out framework.
>
> Regards
>
> -- Milind
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Matt Warnock <[hidden email]
>> wrote:
>
>> My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
>> broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
>> store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
>> we go along.
>>
>> The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
>> demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
>> chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
>> changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
>> little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
>> underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
>> what the problem is?
>>
>> Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
>> download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
>> as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
>> them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
>> broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
>> opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
>> important in that newbies see them first.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> > Hi Jacques:
>> > That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
>> >
>> > My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major
>> > regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about
>> > it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the
>> > second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash
>> > page.
>> >
>> > It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind
>> > would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A
>> > prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that
>> > maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some
>> > other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot
>> > pole.
>> >
>> > Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code,
>> > because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then,
>> > well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a
>> > clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable
>> > enough for my tastes.
>> >
>> > And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I
>> > for one am pretty sure I know why.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Ruth
>> >
>> > Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> > > Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for
>> > > instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
>> > > We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance,
>> > > some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure
>> > > but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other
>> > > SEs) knows about it...
>> > >
>> > > Jacques
>> > >
>> > > From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
>> > > Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message -
>> > > so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude,
>> > > I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us
>> > > help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see
>> > > when I go to the site(s):
>> > >
>> > > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and
>> > > testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>> > >
>> > > 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>> > > 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on
>> > > this page.
>> > > 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>> > >
>> > > Then I go to here -
>> > > http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a
>> > > slightly different picture:
>> > >
>> > > 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy
>> > > after it was moved over.
>> > > -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>> > > 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that
>> > > first page.
>> > >
>> > > Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super
>> > > important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>> > >
>> > > 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>> > > 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>> > >
>> > > I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've
>> > > sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.
>> > > Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure
>> > > you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other
>> > > options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF,
>> > > so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are
>> > > more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as
>> > > well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Ruppert
>> > >
>> > > On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to
>> > >> know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>> > >>
>> > >> -Adrian
>> > >>
>> > >> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> > >>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing
>> > >>> keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new
>> > >>> users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their
>> > >>> browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>> > >>> Regards,
>> > >>> Ruth
>> > >>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> > >>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>> > >>> "myofbiz"
>> > >>> [hidden email]
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
>> RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.
>>
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux-2-2]

Really refreshing, thanks Matt!

Jacques

From: "Matt Warnock" <[hidden email]>

> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 17:12 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> Hi Matt:
>> Thanks for your input. I'm always open to rebuke.
>
> Wasn't intended as rebuke, just (hopefully) helpful observation.  We all
> can use those, I think.
>
>> I take issue with one thing you said: "The primary business is always
>> developing the system". IMO, "developing the system" does not always
>> mean adding code to the project at the expense of some very basic
>> business related tasks. Committers on this project, are always being
>> taken to task for not tying up loose ends (my reference to how Java code
>> is formatted, for example). Why shouldn't the project be held
>> responsible for work effort around the infrastructure. This is like
>> saying that as a committer, you only need take responsibility's for
>> those things that you choose to care about.
>
> Ah, but that's just it-- You can't "hold people responsible" in a
> volunteer organization.  What ya gonna do, fire 'em?  In an ideal world,
> a volunteer would do the whole job, not just their favorite parts.  We'd
> get good code AND good documentation.  But in the Real World(TM), skills
> differ.  Though I CAN do both, I am a much better writer than a coder,
> and I have the good sense to know it.  And as a newbie, I am too low on
> the learning curve to do much more than make (hopefully) helpful
> suggestions as I fight my way through.  And as an old French saying
> goes, "you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar".  If you want
> to catch flies, that is. :)
>
>> I wish I could fix this. Heaven knows I've tried but I'm not a
>> committer. I've been through this with the project "foxes" several times
>> already.  And here's my point: IMO, It is the project's "main" job to
>> see that things are put in place to preserve the project. And maybe that
>> is where we all differ. I say if you are a committer, then you need to
>> take full responsibility for the project and not just those things you
>> find "interesting" or "exciting".
>
> In "The Mythical Man-Month", I think, the author said that managing
> programmers was like trying to herd cats.  Managing volunteer
> programmers, then, is like trying to herd birds.  Not only are they
> (like cats) not herd animals, but they are not even limited to our
> herding plane, and since we don't pay them, they are in no way subject
> to our will.  So if you want to "fix this", all I can say is, good luck
> with that.  Being a committer won't help.  But we can still feed the
> birds, and enjoy their products, and hopefully not be the statues on
> which they perch. :)  (No analogy is perfect.)
>
>> We have gone from "foxes" guarding the chicken coop to no one guarding
>> the chicken coop. I'm not rolling my eyes anymore. I'm just smiling
>> because now there is more opportunity for me to help people figure out
>> how to use OFBiz. Just hope they don't get too scared away before they
>> find me on the web.
>
> Not sure who the "foxes" are, or how they relate to the chicken coop
> (back to birds again).  I doubt anyone wants to hurt OFBiz, they just
> have different views of what is the *MOST* important thing that *THEY*
> can do right *NOW* to advance it.  That is both natural and healthy, and
> the reason that, over time, free enterprise almost always works better
> than planned economies.  
>
> Your "best" or "easiest" solution will not be mine and vice versa, and
> one size never fits all perfectly, but one may be a better approximation
> than another in a particular case, or even for most cases.  Reasonable
> minds can and do differ and even disagree.  
>
> And so I propose Warnock's Razor (a corollary to Hanlon's): "Never
> ascribe to ignorance or stupidity that which is adequately explained by
> a different life experience and point of view".  Or to put it more
> succinctly: "Counterview before Cock-up".  And in FOSS, that is even
> more true-- everyone scratches their own itch first.
>
> I agree with you that there is a problem here in the OFBiz community,
> but I think it is cultural, not technical or administrative.  I think
> there needs to be more grateful abundance (less scarcity) mentality,
> more positive (less negative) energy, and more volunteerism (less
> criticism). But (I hope) this feeling is more than just me saying "Can't
> we all just get along."
>
> More importantly, I think a change in the collective vision can put more
> money in all our pockets.  This can be accomplished by focusing more
> energy on reducing, where possible, the learning curve, so that more
> people can get more real work done faster, thus freeing us all from the
> limits of 80/20 rule.
>
> Silverston posits, I think correctly, that 80% of all businesses
> operations are generally the same, being more or less "standard" or
> non-unique aspects of business in general.  That standard 80% is NOT
> what generates the real profits.  Using the 80/20 rule, that standard
> 80% of the business generates only 20% of the profits, while the other
> 20% (the unique part) drives 80% of the profits.  As a business person,
> I can't afford to ignore the standard 80% (like accounting or tax
> returns) but those usually don't give me any competitive advantage.  But
> OFBiz might possibly change all that.
>
> If I could sit down with OFBiz and get it up and running on the easy and
> standard 80% of my business with minimal effort and no cost, I would
> have a lot more free time for the unique 20% of my business.  That free
> time would in turn 1) increase my appreciation for what I have been
> given, increasing my desire to "pay it forward", and 2) allow me time
> (and money) to work on developing OFBiz for the other unique 20% that is
> *more* critical to my business, and more impact to my bottom line.
> Though my inclination would be to contribute that code, a scarcity
> mentality or competitive considerations might well keep me from doing
> it.  But at the same time, I might well also refine non-competitive
> elements of the "standard" 80%, which I would be even more likely to
> contribute back, improving it for everybody.  
>
> As an OFBiz programmer or VAR, I would want that 80% to be as easy and
> solid as possible, so that it brought the maximum number of possible
> customers into the fold.  That makes customer acquisition easy (a very
> expensive part of any business, and the keystone of so-called "viral"
> marketing).  Once they are in, each customer will want to customize
> their unique 20%, knowing that it will benefit from tight integration
> with the best practices in the 80% that they already have.  That makes
> for a good prospect for a solid revenue stream from each new happy
> customer, though probably not right out of the chute.  
>
> But by contrast, what happens if the 80% is hard? Then, as Ruth rightly
> points out, they run away, but in that scenario NOBODY wins (not even
> the educator or customizer, sorry Ruth).  The community is smaller, the
> dollars are smaller, the customers are already in scarcity mode because
> of the upfront costs, the programmers are continuously reimplementing
> the same customizations (boring), and their customers are worried about
> whether they will ever recoup the customization phase and whether it
> will ever really pay off.  Unfortunately, this is more like what I think
> is happening today, not only in OFBiz, but in ERP generally (look at
> PeopleSoft or SAP, and their customer satisfaction rates).
>
> If this project is Asterisk, it needs FreePBX.  If it is Debian, it
> needs Ubuntu.  If it is Linux, it needs SLS/Slackware and the GNU
> utilities (now I'm really showing my age).  It needs a standard
> distribution that can be up and running usefully very quickly, and then
> customized later.  
>
> IMHO, we have the cart before the horse a bit, and I sense that David
> and others are getting a little bit of burnout from trying to push that
> horse uphill.  Get the horse out in front, and it might be a bit easier
> (and more economically rewarding) for everyone.
>
>>
>> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Likewise.  Just some early impressions.  I hope these ideas will
> generate some discussion, though.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ruth
>>
>> Matt Warnock wrote:
>> > My understanding is that the whole site has just changed hosting.  A few
>> > broken links are to be expected.  Doesn't mean no one is minding the
>> > store-- there is a lot to be done and a few things may be discovered as
>> > we go along.  
>> >
>> > The primary business is always developing the system-- the website that
>> > demonstrates and documents the system is ancillary.  Kind of like
>> > chewing Linus out because kernel.org has an outage or a broken link when
>> > changing hosting companies.  1) It isn't his main job (maybe not even a
>> > little bit). 2) Nothing is perfect, especially when a major change is
>> > underway.  3) How is someone going to know unless they are told exactly
>> > what the problem is?
>> >
>> > Developers are mostly using svn to update, I'd bet.  So a broken
>> > download link would only be apparent to others (mostly first-time users,
>> > as you say).  Logs might mention it, but I don't know anyone that reads
>> > them daily, do you?  Automated log analyzers might help here to report
>> > broken links that developers don't often see.  So let's view this as an
>> > opportunity to improve ancillary parts of the system, which are also
>> > important in that newbies see them first.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 13:11 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> >  
>> >> Hi Jacques:
>> >> That would be really nice, but I'm not even at that stage yet.
>> >>
>> >> My problem is with the download web page. There has been a major
>> >> regression here and no one has said a word (until me, right now) about
>> >> it. That leads me to say: "Who is minding the store?". This is the
>> >> second or third thing anyone interested in OFBiz sees...after the splash
>> >> page.
>> >>
>> >> It's a mess of "stuff" that no one in their "right" (or "left") mind
>> >> would bother to spend too much time trying to decipher. Worst case: A
>> >> prospective user leaves the site (with a slight hint suggesting that
>> >> maybe the code is as disorganized as the web page) and downloads some
>> >> other project's code. Bye-bye prospect. Wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot
>> >> pole.
>> >>
>> >> Best case: A prospect user will end up downloading the trunk code,
>> >> because, on this web page, all roads lead to a trunk download. Then,
>> >> well how much fun is that going to be for a new user who doesn't have a
>> >> clue where to start? Bye-bye prospect. I tried, but code isn't stable
>> >> enough for my tastes.
>> >>
>> >> And some wonder why there isn't more OFBiz activity out there. Well, I
>> >> for one am pretty sure I know why.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Ruth
>> >>
>> >> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> >>    
>> >>> Some ASF projects are very sucessful yet with strong competition, for
>> >>> instance ServiceMix vs Mule, Geronimo, vs..., etc.
>> >>> We may mimic some of the ways they are doing things. For instance,
>> >>> some time ago Chris Snow asked for a better SEO, I'm not quite sure
>> >>> but I think it'a about exporting the wiki and make Google (and other
>> >>> SEs) knows about it...
>> >>>
>> >>> Jacques
>> >>>
>> >>> From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
>> >>> Ruth, I'm sure there's some good that could come out of your message -
>> >>> so against my general nature of responding to this type of attitude,
>> >>> I'm going to try and help you phrase this in a way that will help us
>> >>> help infra to try to meet what you're looking for. Here's what I see
>> >>> when I go to the site(s):
>> >>>
>> >>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/snapshots/ - not downloading and
>> >>> testing anything - just looking at what I see:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. The nightly trunk seems to be updated daily.
>> >>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to, for some reason not be being updated on
>> >>> this page.
>> >>> 3. There aren't many 4.0 releases being built.
>> >>>
>> >>> Then I go to here -
>> >>> http://ci.apache.org/projects/ofbiz/archive/snapshots/ - and I see a
>> >>> slightly different picture:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. The trunk builds aren't really archives they're simply another copy
>> >>> after it was moved over.
>> >>> -- The archives are there though from when HotWax was managing it.
>> >>> 2. The 9.04 builds seem to really be the ones that we'd want on that
>> >>> first page.
>> >>>
>> >>> Now, since I know that this release and the downloads are super
>> >>> important to you, I'm really more interested in hearing you:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1. Lay out the way you'd like to see these pages work.
>> >>> 2. Even show some examples of other projects that you _do_ like
>> >>>
>> >>> I hope this helps Ruth - as Adrian and Jacopo mentioned, what you've
>> >>> sent here is just a whine, not a helpful way for anyone to improve.  
>> >>> Put in the time and help us to make it more like you like and I'm sure
>> >>> you'll be more pleased with the result.  Btw, all of those other
>> >>> options are not the same type of community driven projects as the ASF,
>> >>> so it's hard to manage the same way.  When commercial interests are
>> >>> more intertwined with the project, there are definitely benefits (as
>> >>> well as drawbacks), so let's at least acknowledge those.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> Ruppert
>> >>>
>> >>> On Feb 5, 2010, at 10:23 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>      
>> >>>> If there is a problem with the OFBiz site, it would be helpful to
>> >>>> know what it is. Remarks like this are not helpful.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -Adrian
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> >>>>        
>> >>>>> This was meant as a sarcastic, "I can't believe this kind of thing
>> >>>>> keeps falling through the cracks", kind of remark. No wonder new
>> >>>>> users shy away. I mean, no wonder new users run as fast as their
>> >>>>> browsers will take them to OpenBravo, OpenERP, Magento...
>> >>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>> Ruth
>> >>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>> >>>>> "myofbiz"
>> >>>>> [hidden email]
>> >>>>>          
>> >>>
>> >>>      
>> >
>> >
>> >  
>
>
> --
> Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
> RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.
>