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

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Hi Jacques:
The fact remains that OS Commerce has a huge installed base and has a
long way to fall before it passes OFBiz on the way down.
Regards,
Ruth
Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> 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]

From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
> 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.

That's not exactly what I meant. Who are those end-users I was trying to talk about?  Technical aware persons, with influence in
companies but not enough time to look into every technical details (CTO, CIO, etc.). So they make (or at least help to make) very
important decisions (financial decision, I mean) for the future of their entreprises. And for that try to get as much as possible
information when making a choice between competitors. It's already a good news when they are considering OSS. Then chances are they
will compare projects. This is the target I was talking about. I personnaly think that a *huge* effort as been already done in OFBIz
to give them ways to make their choice. I was simply saying that we should try to continue this effort. Not only some persons as it
was some years ago, when the knowledge was not as shared as today. For instance the effort you made, David, on the Framework *open
and (now) free* documentation was certainly one the most important the project benefited. But I'm not quite sure (euphemism ;o) all
the decision-makers (or helpers) take the time to read it thourougly and to understand all subtleties while evaluating OFBiz. So
now, what we need is a satellite map (kind of marketing) to facilitate the decisions of these guys and, as much as possible, to make
them happy to choice OFBiz :o)

Some themes I foresee:

1) Why you should use the trunk instead of a release,
2) Why OFBIz is here to stay, independtly of the people working currently on it
3) Why... ok I'm lazy today (actually more knackered but who cares ;o)...

The theme 1 is one of the most important to me because it distinguishs OFBiz from its competitors, even VAR projects based on OFBiz.
It allows to follow the projects and, if inclined to, to contribute to it and to make it grow along your own needs.

When you Google for "OFBiz" in France you get these pages in this order
http://ofbiz.apache.org/
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OFBiz
http://www.les7arts.com/assist/ArgumentaireOFBiz.htm

The 1st is obvious, the 2d I frequently garden and I'm happy to see it there, the 3d was a page I wrote in 2005, and is a free
translation (with a lot of changes and adaptation through the years) from an old Automation Group site page. Something is missing in
this document, the point 1. It's now months that I want to write something about that. Because I believe it's why so much projects
based on OFBiz did not evolve with OFBiz and became legacy. This is bad for 2 reasons: these projects will not benefit of all the
enhancements OFBiz is able to give them, OFBiz does not benefit of potential long term contributors. From my experience, few
projects succeed in this way (even VAR projects) because they neglict this paramount point!

There are already a lot of things spreaded in the wiki. I will try, when I will get a chance, to make something more comprehensible
for new comers (I prefer this word than newbies or even worse noobs ;o)

Sorry for he long post, I have this in mind for a long time...

Jacques

[Jacques Le Roux-2-2]

Ruth,

I bet OS Commerce will sink quickly because of Magento. We don't care about legacy... OS Commerce is already history...

Jacques

From: "Ruth Hoffman" <[hidden email]>

> Hi Jacques:
> The fact remains that OS Commerce has a huge installed base and has a
> long way to fall before it passes OFBiz on the way down.
> Regards,
> Ruth
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[Tim Ruppert]

+1 - OS Commerce has a huge install base, but they are quickly migrating away.

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Feb 6, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Ruth,
>
> I bet OS Commerce will sink quickly because of Magento. We don't care about legacy... OS Commerce is already history...
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Ruth Hoffman" <[hidden email]>
>> Hi Jacques:
>> The fact remains that OS Commerce has a huge installed base and has a long way to fall before it passes OFBiz on the way down.
>> Regards,
>> Ruth
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> 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]

Yes we live in the IT bizness, I"m there for 25 years now, and I have seen so much already. Before working in the IT bizness I
worked almost 10 years in very various other kinds, so I have a small experience of the world out there. What would be a working
life in other bizness areas is 5 years here.

Also I remember speaking with Andrew Sykes, 4 years ago. He was a musician one upon his life, almost professional, I too (I used to
be a drummer, far to be a pro though ;). We agreed that music is great but everyday exercices to keep the level is boring. IT is
not: it always surprises you, that's why I still enjoy this job, I love to be surprised, after all, is it not what life is all
about, who likes to be bored?

OK enough of socialization attempts (it comes certainly from social isolation while working alone, almost at home...)

Jacques

From: "Tim Ruppert" <[hidden email]>
+1 - OS Commerce has a huge install base, but they are quickly migrating away.

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Feb 6, 2010, at 9:02 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Ruth,
>
> I bet OS Commerce will sink quickly because of Magento. We don't care about legacy... OS Commerce is already history...
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Ruth Hoffman" <[hidden email]>
>> Hi Jacques:
>> The fact remains that OS Commerce has a huge installed base and has a long way to fall before it passes OFBiz on the way down.
>> Regards,
>> Ruth
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

[bsreekanth]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[Chris Snow-3]

Hi Babu,

1) I found this very frustrating too.
2) I requested the site to be indexed by google, but in the meantime I
always do my search from the search box on www.ofbiz.org.  Make sure to
prefix your search term with 'ofbiz' so you don't get back stuff from
all apache projects.
3 & 4) I was amazed at how much stuff gets repeatedly answered on the
forum.  My contribution is that I put a page on the FAQ whenever I get
help clarifying how to do something.

Cheers,

Chris

bsreekanth wrote:

> Hello,
>    this is my first post to the group, and learning Ofbiz the hard way
> (debugging through code, following the Beginner's Development Guide, Packet
> book, Data modelling etc.). Though everyone desire to have more documents
> etc, it is amazing the contribution mainly by few individuals. Few things I
> noted,
> 1. rather than the lack of information, I was stuck with the mix of
> old//outdated and current info, which lead to distrust and extra effort.
> 2. The documents are not indexed correctly, and cannot navigate from the
> main wiki page. I got the below link through another website, during google
> search.
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/How+to+Setup+a+Company
> not sure how relevant, but the point is it is wasted effort by the author,
> and someone needed the info.
> 3. It is amazing the level of help people get through the forum. I have seen
> almost all questions were answered on the same day. At the same time, it
> would be much effortless if we had a properly indexed documentation. Rather
> than explaining things over and over, we should be able to point to the
> correct section in the manual. It also help many people, if the mentor
> doesn't see the relevant information in the document, to add the content
> himself or raise a (Jira) issue for that.
> 4. I myself collecting information regarding the data model, making notes
> during my learning etc. It would be easy for me to add the content if we
> have a skeleton of required information  as mentioned by Matt. It would be
> great if someone senior in the group can just start with an index page.
>
> thanks,
> Babu.
>  

[Brendan Vogt]

Hi guys,

I think this is the issue that most people have when starting out on OFBiz.
I gave up 2 years ago, but going to give it another shot now.  I am going to
buy those data modeling books.

Brendan



On 6 February 2010 20:29, Christopher Snow <[hidden email]>wrote:

> Hi Babu,
>
> 1) I found this very frustrating too.
> 2) I requested the site to be indexed by google, but in the meantime I
> always do my search from the search box on www.ofbiz.org.  Make sure to
> prefix your search term with 'ofbiz' so you don't get back stuff from all
> apache projects.
> 3 & 4) I was amazed at how much stuff gets repeatedly answered on the
> forum.  My contribution is that I put a page on the FAQ whenever I get help
> clarifying how to do something.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> bsreekanth wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>   this is my first post to the group, and learning Ofbiz the hard way
>> (debugging through code, following the Beginner's Development Guide,
>> Packet
>> book, Data modelling etc.). Though everyone desire to have more documents
>> etc, it is amazing the contribution mainly by few individuals. Few things
>> I
>> noted,
>> 1. rather than the lack of information, I was stuck with the mix of
>> old//outdated and current info, which lead to distrust and extra effort.
>> 2. The documents are not indexed correctly, and cannot navigate from the
>> main wiki page. I got the below link through another website, during
>> google
>> search.
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/How+to+Setup+a+Company
>> not sure how relevant, but the point is it is wasted effort by the author,
>> and someone needed the info.
>> 3. It is amazing the level of help people get through the forum. I have
>> seen
>> almost all questions were answered on the same day. At the same time, it
>> would be much effortless if we had a properly indexed documentation.
>> Rather
>> than explaining things over and over, we should be able to point to the
>> correct section in the manual. It also help many people, if the mentor
>> doesn't see the relevant information in the document, to add the content
>> himself or raise a (Jira) issue for that.
>> 4. I myself collecting information regarding the data model, making notes
>> during my learning etc. It would be easy for me to add the content if we
>> have a skeleton of required information  as mentioned by Matt. It would be
>> great if someone senior in the group can just start with an index page.
>> thanks,
>> Babu.
>>
>>
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux-2-2]

I think I make it pretty clear http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Mailing+Lists#MailingLists-OFBizWikiSearch (there
is also a backlink from FAQ 1st paragraph)
3/4: I created the FAQ for this reason, but obviously we can't put all in/from the FAQ

It's hard to organize an open wiki, I tried many times but, as it's open, quickly things move and you have to begin again...

Jacques

From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]>

> Hi Babu,
>
> 1) I found this very frustrating too.
> 2) I requested the site to be indexed by google, but in the meantime I always do my search from the search box on www.ofbiz.org.
> Make sure to prefix your search term with 'ofbiz' so you don't get back stuff from all apache projects.
> 3 & 4) I was amazed at how much stuff gets repeatedly answered on the forum.  My contribution is that I put a page on the FAQ
> whenever I get help clarifying how to do something.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> bsreekanth wrote:
>> Hello,
>>    this is my first post to the group, and learning Ofbiz the hard way
>> (debugging through code, following the Beginner's Development Guide, Packet
>> book, Data modelling etc.). Though everyone desire to have more documents
>> etc, it is amazing the contribution mainly by few individuals. Few things I
>> noted,
>> 1. rather than the lack of information, I was stuck with the mix of
>> old//outdated and current info, which lead to distrust and extra effort. 2. The documents are not indexed correctly, and cannot
>> navigate from the
>> main wiki page. I got the below link through another website, during google
>> search.
>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/How+to+Setup+a+Company
>> not sure how relevant, but the point is it is wasted effort by the author,
>> and someone needed the info.
>> 3. It is amazing the level of help people get through the forum. I have seen
>> almost all questions were answered on the same day. At the same time, it
>> would be much effortless if we had a properly indexed documentation. Rather
>> than explaining things over and over, we should be able to point to the
>> correct section in the manual. It also help many people, if the mentor
>> doesn't see the relevant information in the document, to add the content
>> himself or raise a (Jira) issue for that.
>> 4. I myself collecting information regarding the data model, making notes
>> during my learning etc. It would be easy for me to add the content if we
>> have a skeleton of required information  as mentioned by Matt. It would be
>> great if someone senior in the group can just start with an index page.
>> thanks,
>> Babu.
>>
>

[Chris Snow-3]

Hi Jacques, like most pages on the wiki I didn't even know that one
existed - sorry...

Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> I think I make it pretty clear
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Mailing+Lists#MailingLists-OFBizWikiSearch 
> (there
> is also a backlink from FAQ 1st paragraph)
> 3/4: I created the FAQ for this reason, but obviously we can't put all
> in/from the FAQ
>
> It's hard to organize an open wiki, I tried many times but, as it's
> open, quickly things move and you have to begin again...
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]>
>> Hi Babu,
>>
>> 1) I found this very frustrating too.
>> 2) I requested the site to be indexed by google, but in the meantime
>> I always do my search from the search box on www.ofbiz.org.
>> Make sure to prefix your search term with 'ofbiz' so you don't get
>> back stuff from all apache projects.
>> 3 & 4) I was amazed at how much stuff gets repeatedly answered on the
>> forum.  My contribution is that I put a page on the FAQ
>> whenever I get help clarifying how to do something.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> bsreekanth wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>    this is my first post to the group, and learning Ofbiz the hard way
>>> (debugging through code, following the Beginner's Development Guide,
>>> Packet
>>> book, Data modelling etc.). Though everyone desire to have more
>>> documents
>>> etc, it is amazing the contribution mainly by few individuals. Few
>>> things I
>>> noted,
>>> 1. rather than the lack of information, I was stuck with the mix of
>>> old//outdated and current info, which lead to distrust and extra
>>> effort. 2. The documents are not indexed correctly, and cannot
>>> navigate from the
>>> main wiki page. I got the below link through another website, during
>>> google
>>> search.
>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/How+to+Setup+a+Company
>>> not sure how relevant, but the point is it is wasted effort by the
>>> author,
>>> and someone needed the info.
>>> 3. It is amazing the level of help people get through the forum. I
>>> have seen
>>> almost all questions were answered on the same day. At the same
>>> time, it
>>> would be much effortless if we had a properly indexed documentation.
>>> Rather
>>> than explaining things over and over, we should be able to point to the
>>> correct section in the manual. It also help many people, if the mentor
>>> doesn't see the relevant information in the document, to add the
>>> content
>>> himself or raise a (Jira) issue for that.
>>> 4. I myself collecting information regarding the data model, making
>>> notes
>>> during my learning etc. It would be easy for me to add the content
>>> if we
>>> have a skeleton of required information  as mentioned by Matt. It
>>> would be
>>> great if someone senior in the group can just start with an index page.
>>> thanks,
>>> Babu.
>>>
>>
>

[bsreekanth]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[Matt Warnock]

Jaques, I think you have hit the nail on the head.  Specific responses
follow.

 Sat, 2010-02-06 at 17:02 +0100, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
> > 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.
>
> That's not exactly what I meant. Who are those end-users I was trying to talk about?  Technical aware persons, with influence in
> companies but not enough time to look into every technical details (CTO, CIO, etc.). So they make (or at least help to make) very
> important decisions (financial decision, I mean) for the future of their entreprises. And for that try to get as much as possible
> information when making a choice between competitors. It's already a good news when they are considering OSS. Then chances are they
> will compare projects. This is the target I was talking about. I personnaly think that a *huge* effort as been already done in OFBIz
> to give them ways to make their choice. I was simply saying that we should try to continue this effort. Not only some persons as it
> was some years ago, when the knowledge was not as shared as today. For instance the effort you made, David, on the Framework *open
> and (now) free* documentation was certainly one the most important the project benefited. But I'm not quite sure (euphemism ;o) all
> the decision-makers (or helpers) take the time to read it thourougly and to understand all subtleties while evaluating OFBiz. So
> now, what we need is a satellite map (kind of marketing) to facilitate the decisions of these guys and, as much as possible, to make
> them happy to choice OFBiz :o)

I admit it, I am one of these PHBs.  I am looking to implement OFBiz as
a long-term solution.  But the learning curve is steep.  Someone earlier
today estimated 300-400 hours.  That's 10 weeks, and I would submit
there ain't a PHB alive, tech-savvy or not, who that has that kind of
time.  Hiring it is expensive and assumes availability, which is
uncertain.  

We need more ease of use OOTB (including clearer and more concise docs),
so that (as they say in perl) the easy  stuff is easy, and the hard
stuff is possible.

> Some themes I foresee:
>
> 1) Why you should use the trunk instead of a release,
> 2) Why OFBIz is here to stay, independtly of the people working currently on it
> 3) Why... ok I'm lazy today (actually more knackered but who cares ;o)...
>
> The theme 1 is one of the most important to me because it distinguishs OFBiz from its competitors, even VAR projects based on OFBiz.
> It allows to follow the projects and, if inclined to, to contribute to it and to make it grow along your own needs.

As a PHB, themes 1 and 2 are really important to me, and I still don't
know that I made the "right" decision.  I just hope so.  Don't know how
you can satisfy me on point 2, but I watched a long time before pulling
the trigger (and I still haven't pulled the trigger except in devoting
resources to get into it).

On theme 1, I seemed to read, and was also told by experienced people
that I should be on 9.04, as it is more stable than trunk.  But I now
really doubt that should be the case, for several reasons.

1) development is progressing at a rapid rate, perhaps too rapid, and
the 9.04 code base is 10 months old now.

2) Bug fixes don't generally get applied to the releases, only to trunk.

3) It seems from discussions here that the underlying model doesn't
usually change much, and while code is being added, it isn't often
breaking prior code.  This is good.

So if I want to contribute (and I do, though I doubt my ability to
contribute much) I gather I should really be on trunk.  

> When you Google for "OFBiz" in France you get these pages in this order
> http://ofbiz.apache.org/
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OFBiz
> http://www.les7arts.com/assist/ArgumentaireOFBiz.htm
>
> The 1st is obvious, the 2d I frequently garden and I'm happy to see it there, the 3d was a page I wrote in 2005, and is a free
> translation (with a lot of changes and adaptation through the years) from an old Automation Group site page. Something is missing in
> this document, the point 1. It's now months that I want to write something about that. Because I believe it's why so much projects
> based on OFBiz did not evolve with OFBiz and became legacy. This is bad for 2 reasons: these projects will not benefit of all the
> enhancements OFBiz is able to give them, OFBiz does not benefit of potential long term contributors. From my experience, few
> projects succeed in this way (even VAR projects) because they neglict this paramount point!
>
> There are already a lot of things spreaded in the wiki. I will try, when I will get a chance, to make something more comprehensible
> for new comers (I prefer this word than newbies or even worse noobs ;o)
>

I agree there is a lot in the Wiki, but it isn't very accessible.  A lot
of people (me included) are asking questions here, and being referred to
things they couldn't find on their own.  We need to fix that, and I'm
happy to help organize the wiki with some kind of index if I can.

Just to give old hands an idea what newbies (and PHBs) like me struggle
with, and need to find easily:

I am an OFBiz newbie, so that is the first issue.  But it isn't the only
one.  I am an SVN newbie too.  And a Java newbie.  And an XML newbie.
Haven't tried Eclipse yet.  Not to mention half a dozen other new
technologies here.

Java is just another language, I have learned about 20 to date, so that
isn't that big an issue, but there are a lot of libraries out there to
learn.  

XML is close enough to HTML that I don't feel completely at sea, but I
don't know where all the DTDs are.  I see seed and configuration data
and the like stored in XML files which to me seems a very verbose and
error-prone way to edit/change data, but I assume there are reasons for
this that I don't understand yet.  Generally when I have seen XML files
used for configuration (like /etc/cups/printers.conf) you don't edit
those by hand, there is a GUI for that.

Subversion seems simple enough in the classic shared-codebase scenario,
but if there is a tutorial out there on "How to update from a shared
repository without clobbering your local modifications" I haven't seen
it.  As a PHB relying on a moving SVN target, I need to know how to keep
my local changes intact while updating code.

Very little about OFBiz seems intuitive.  To some extent I know that is
a result of necessary complexity, like Party/Party Groups and related
data.  No one thinks that way in business, or even in law (I was a
lawyer in a previous life), we all think about People and Organizations,
but terms are relatively easy to learn, at least compared to alien
concepts like workflows and virtual products.  But I still don't know
yet how to get standard Sales Leads (source, date, name, address, phone,
comments) into my OFBiz database in an automated fashion.

The code is currently structured into Framework (which I think I
understand, though the edges are fuzzy to more than just me),
Applications (which seem to be subject-related, though OFBiz itself is
an application), Special Purpose (an odd catch-all, since everything has
a Special Purpose, but like Steve Martin in The Jerk, we might not know
what it is yet) and Hot-Deploy (which really seems to mean "local").

The whole update process makes me nervous.  I don't know what quality
controls are applied to code that is merged into the base, or whether
database design changes break things.  With perl for example, an
automated test suite runs every time I update a library, so I get a warm
fuzzy feeling that the update hasn't broken anything I use.  DBMS code
is traditionally the easiest to break, and at the same time production
systems have huge data investments, and a day outage due to a DBMS
change is NOT an option.  What does OFBiz do to ensure that doesn't
happen?





> Sorry for he long post, I have this in mind for a long time...
>
> Jacques


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

[bsreekanth]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[Matt Warnock]

On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 12:32 -0700, 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.

Based on your feedback and that of others, I have added a new outline
page to the home page of the wiki at the following URL:

http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Documentation+Overview

This contains the ordered overview I started and shared earlier.  I hope
I haven't stepped on anyone's toes.  It isn't pretty, just wiki pages,
but hopefully it helps the newbies like me.

I have started to add a couple of pages to flesh it out, but I know most
of this stuff exists elsewhere.  I only added a couple 1) as proof of
concept, so people could get a feel for what I am suggesting, and 2) to
see how I need to link things both inside and outside the wiki (personal
sandbox). I still have things to learn there.

I am really new to all this, so please, if 1) I have done something
wrong, please advise, and 2) if I have done it right, please add the
best links you know of to flesh out this index.  As I say, I know it is
out there, but strewn all over, and I'd like to collect it up, if you
can tell me where to find it.  In particular, if I am polluting the wiki
namespace with this, please let me know what I should do differently.

I have tried to keep the stuff really succinct and clear from a newbie's
point of view-- which I know only too clearly.  

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

[Bruno Busco]

Thank you Matt,
I think this schematic approach will help.

-Bruno

2010/2/7 Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>:

> On Fri, 2010-02-05 at 12:32 -0700, 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.
>
> Based on your feedback and that of others, I have added a new outline
> page to the home page of the wiki at the following URL:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Documentation+Overview
>
> This contains the ordered overview I started and shared earlier.  I hope
> I haven't stepped on anyone's toes.  It isn't pretty, just wiki pages,
> but hopefully it helps the newbies like me.
>
> I have started to add a couple of pages to flesh it out, but I know most
> of this stuff exists elsewhere.  I only added a couple 1) as proof of
> concept, so people could get a feel for what I am suggesting, and 2) to
> see how I need to link things both inside and outside the wiki (personal
> sandbox). I still have things to learn there.
>
> I am really new to all this, so please, if 1) I have done something
> wrong, please advise, and 2) if I have done it right, please add the
> best links you know of to flesh out this index.  As I say, I know it is
> out there, but strewn all over, and I'd like to collect it up, if you
> can tell me where to find it.  In particular, if I am polluting the wiki
> namespace with this, please let me know what I should do differently.
>
> I have tried to keep the stuff really succinct and clear from a newbie's
> point of view-- which I know only too clearly.
>
> --
> Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
> RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.
>
>

[Chris Snow-3]

Matt, what was the 300 - 400 hours for?  I think that time would give
you the capability to develop a standalone solution.  If you want to use
existing functionality (order mgt, invoicing, shipping, mfg, workeffort,
etc) you need a lot more time depending on which functionality you use.  
I've been using ofbiz pretty heavily for nearly a year now, and have a
'good' understanding of developing solutions.  In terms of the
components, I am only really starting to get a deep understanding of how
workefforts work.  If fact some discussions I've had on the ML suggest
that it may not be possible to know all of ofbiz at all.  Instead you
have to know how to find the answers to the areas you are trying to
implement.  However to know how to get the answers, you need to know the
questions to ask.  For this you need a good understanding of the overall
system, for which there is no documentation except the universal data
models.



Matt Warnock wrote:

> Jaques, I think you have hit the nail on the head.  Specific responses
> follow.
>
>  Sat, 2010-02-06 at 17:02 +0100, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>  
>> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>>    
>>> 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.
>>>      
>> That's not exactly what I meant. Who are those end-users I was trying to talk about?  Technical aware persons, with influence in
>> companies but not enough time to look into every technical details (CTO, CIO, etc.). So they make (or at least help to make) very
>> important decisions (financial decision, I mean) for the future of their entreprises. And for that try to get as much as possible
>> information when making a choice between competitors. It's already a good news when they are considering OSS. Then chances are they
>> will compare projects. This is the target I was talking about. I personnaly think that a *huge* effort as been already done in OFBIz
>> to give them ways to make their choice. I was simply saying that we should try to continue this effort. Not only some persons as it
>> was some years ago, when the knowledge was not as shared as today. For instance the effort you made, David, on the Framework *open
>> and (now) free* documentation was certainly one the most important the project benefited. But I'm not quite sure (euphemism ;o) all
>> the decision-makers (or helpers) take the time to read it thourougly and to understand all subtleties while evaluating OFBiz. So
>> now, what we need is a satellite map (kind of marketing) to facilitate the decisions of these guys and, as much as possible, to make
>> them happy to choice OFBiz :o)
>>    
>
> I admit it, I am one of these PHBs.  I am looking to implement OFBiz as
> a long-term solution.  But the learning curve is steep.  Someone earlier
> today estimated 300-400 hours.  That's 10 weeks, and I would submit
> there ain't a PHB alive, tech-savvy or not, who that has that kind of
> time.  Hiring it is expensive and assumes availability, which is
> uncertain.  
>
> We need more ease of use OOTB (including clearer and more concise docs),
> so that (as they say in perl) the easy  stuff is easy, and the hard
> stuff is possible.
>
>  
>> Some themes I foresee:
>>
>> 1) Why you should use the trunk instead of a release,
>> 2) Why OFBIz is here to stay, independtly of the people working currently on it
>> 3) Why... ok I'm lazy today (actually more knackered but who cares ;o)...
>>
>> The theme 1 is one of the most important to me because it distinguishs OFBiz from its competitors, even VAR projects based on OFBiz.
>> It allows to follow the projects and, if inclined to, to contribute to it and to make it grow along your own needs.
>>    
>
> As a PHB, themes 1 and 2 are really important to me, and I still don't
> know that I made the "right" decision.  I just hope so.  Don't know how
> you can satisfy me on point 2, but I watched a long time before pulling
> the trigger (and I still haven't pulled the trigger except in devoting
> resources to get into it).
>
> On theme 1, I seemed to read, and was also told by experienced people
> that I should be on 9.04, as it is more stable than trunk.  But I now
> really doubt that should be the case, for several reasons.
>
> 1) development is progressing at a rapid rate, perhaps too rapid, and
> the 9.04 code base is 10 months old now.
>
> 2) Bug fixes don't generally get applied to the releases, only to trunk.
>
> 3) It seems from discussions here that the underlying model doesn't
> usually change much, and while code is being added, it isn't often
> breaking prior code.  This is good.
>
> So if I want to contribute (and I do, though I doubt my ability to
> contribute much) I gather I should really be on trunk.  
>
>  
>> When you Google for "OFBiz" in France you get these pages in this order
>> http://ofbiz.apache.org/
>> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OFBiz
>> http://www.les7arts.com/assist/ArgumentaireOFBiz.htm
>>
>> The 1st is obvious, the 2d I frequently garden and I'm happy to see it there, the 3d was a page I wrote in 2005, and is a free
>> translation (with a lot of changes and adaptation through the years) from an old Automation Group site page. Something is missing in
>> this document, the point 1. It's now months that I want to write something about that. Because I believe it's why so much projects
>> based on OFBiz did not evolve with OFBiz and became legacy. This is bad for 2 reasons: these projects will not benefit of all the
>> enhancements OFBiz is able to give them, OFBiz does not benefit of potential long term contributors. From my experience, few
>> projects succeed in this way (even VAR projects) because they neglict this paramount point!
>>
>> There are already a lot of things spreaded in the wiki. I will try, when I will get a chance, to make something more comprehensible
>> for new comers (I prefer this word than newbies or even worse noobs ;o)
>>
>>    
>
> I agree there is a lot in the Wiki, but it isn't very accessible.  A lot
> of people (me included) are asking questions here, and being referred to
> things they couldn't find on their own.  We need to fix that, and I'm
> happy to help organize the wiki with some kind of index if I can.
>
> Just to give old hands an idea what newbies (and PHBs) like me struggle
> with, and need to find easily:
>
> I am an OFBiz newbie, so that is the first issue.  But it isn't the only
> one.  I am an SVN newbie too.  And a Java newbie.  And an XML newbie.
> Haven't tried Eclipse yet.  Not to mention half a dozen other new
> technologies here.
>
> Java is just another language, I have learned about 20 to date, so that
> isn't that big an issue, but there are a lot of libraries out there to
> learn.  
>
> XML is close enough to HTML that I don't feel completely at sea, but I
> don't know where all the DTDs are.  I see seed and configuration data
> and the like stored in XML files which to me seems a very verbose and
> error-prone way to edit/change data, but I assume there are reasons for
> this that I don't understand yet.  Generally when I have seen XML files
> used for configuration (like /etc/cups/printers.conf) you don't edit
> those by hand, there is a GUI for that.
>
> Subversion seems simple enough in the classic shared-codebase scenario,
> but if there is a tutorial out there on "How to update from a shared
> repository without clobbering your local modifications" I haven't seen
> it.  As a PHB relying on a moving SVN target, I need to know how to keep
> my local changes intact while updating code.
>
> Very little about OFBiz seems intuitive.  To some extent I know that is
> a result of necessary complexity, like Party/Party Groups and related
> data.  No one thinks that way in business, or even in law (I was a
> lawyer in a previous life), we all think about People and Organizations,
> but terms are relatively easy to learn, at least compared to alien
> concepts like workflows and virtual products.  But I still don't know
> yet how to get standard Sales Leads (source, date, name, address, phone,
> comments) into my OFBiz database in an automated fashion.
>
> The code is currently structured into Framework (which I think I
> understand, though the edges are fuzzy to more than just me),
> Applications (which seem to be subject-related, though OFBiz itself is
> an application), Special Purpose (an odd catch-all, since everything has
> a Special Purpose, but like Steve Martin in The Jerk, we might not know
> what it is yet) and Hot-Deploy (which really seems to mean "local").
>
> The whole update process makes me nervous.  I don't know what quality
> controls are applied to code that is merged into the base, or whether
> database design changes break things.  With perl for example, an
> automated test suite runs every time I update a library, so I get a warm
> fuzzy feeling that the update hasn't broken anything I use.  DBMS code
> is traditionally the easiest to break, and at the same time production
> systems have huge data investments, and a day outage due to a DBMS
> change is NOT an option.  What does OFBiz do to ensure that doesn't
> happen?
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>> Sorry for he long post, I have this in mind for a long time...
>>
>> Jacques
>>    
>
>
>  

[Jacques Le Roux-2-2]

From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]>
[Snip]
>For this you need a good understanding of the overall system, for which there is no documentation except the universal data models.

Wrong, from an OFBiz technical POV: http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/MoBr
See  AdvancedFrameworkTranscription20060824.pdf in attachment
This document is as important to me as the Silvertson's data model. It's free and open (see .doc)!
Related http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/I4Br

If you want to have a quick grasp, the Pack book is good enough (even if based on R4.0). I was a reviewer, and I know well Ruppert,
who actually wrote the book. Jonathon gave up, but as he began he got to keep his name 1st.

HTH

Jacques

>
>
> Matt Warnock wrote:
>> Jaques, I think you have hit the nail on the head.  Specific responses
>> follow.
>>
>>  Sat, 2010-02-06 at 17:02 +0100, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>>> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>> That's not exactly what I meant. Who are those end-users I was trying to talk about?  Technical aware persons, with influence in
>>> companies but not enough time to look into every technical details (CTO, CIO, etc.). So they make (or at least help to make)
>>> very
>>> important decisions (financial decision, I mean) for the future of their entreprises. And for that try to get as much as
>>> possible
>>> information when making a choice between competitors. It's already a good news when they are considering OSS. Then chances are
>>> they
>>> will compare projects. This is the target I was talking about. I personnaly think that a *huge* effort as been already done in
>>> OFBIz
>>> to give them ways to make their choice. I was simply saying that we should try to continue this effort. Not only some persons as
>>> it
>>> was some years ago, when the knowledge was not as shared as today. For instance the effort you made, David, on the Framework
>>> *open
>>> and (now) free* documentation was certainly one the most important the project benefited. But I'm not quite sure (euphemism ;o)
>>> all
>>> the decision-makers (or helpers) take the time to read it thourougly and to understand all subtleties while evaluating OFBiz. So
>>> now, what we need is a satellite map (kind of marketing) to facilitate the decisions of these guys and, as much as possible, to
>>> make
>>> them happy to choice OFBiz :o)
>>>
>>
>> I admit it, I am one of these PHBs.  I am looking to implement OFBiz as
>> a long-term solution.  But the learning curve is steep.  Someone earlier
>> today estimated 300-400 hours.  That's 10 weeks, and I would submit
>> there ain't a PHB alive, tech-savvy or not, who that has that kind of
>> time.  Hiring it is expensive and assumes availability, which is
>> uncertain.
>> We need more ease of use OOTB (including clearer and more concise docs),
>> so that (as they say in perl) the easy  stuff is easy, and the hard
>> stuff is possible.
>>
>>
>>> Some themes I foresee:
>>>
>>> 1) Why you should use the trunk instead of a release,
>>> 2) Why OFBIz is here to stay, independtly of the people working currently on it
>>> 3) Why... ok I'm lazy today (actually more knackered but who cares ;o)...
>>>
>>> The theme 1 is one of the most important to me because it distinguishs OFBiz from its competitors, even VAR projects based on
>>> OFBiz.
>>> It allows to follow the projects and, if inclined to, to contribute to it and to make it grow along your own needs.
>>>
>>
>> As a PHB, themes 1 and 2 are really important to me, and I still don't
>> know that I made the "right" decision.  I just hope so.  Don't know how
>> you can satisfy me on point 2, but I watched a long time before pulling
>> the trigger (and I still haven't pulled the trigger except in devoting
>> resources to get into it).
>>
>> On theme 1, I seemed to read, and was also told by experienced people
>> that I should be on 9.04, as it is more stable than trunk.  But I now
>> really doubt that should be the case, for several reasons.
>>
>> 1) development is progressing at a rapid rate, perhaps too rapid, and
>> the 9.04 code base is 10 months old now.
>>
>> 2) Bug fixes don't generally get applied to the releases, only to trunk.
>>
>> 3) It seems from discussions here that the underlying model doesn't
>> usually change much, and while code is being added, it isn't often
>> breaking prior code.  This is good.
>>
>> So if I want to contribute (and I do, though I doubt my ability to
>> contribute much) I gather I should really be on trunk.
>>
>>> When you Google for "OFBiz" in France you get these pages in this order
>>> http://ofbiz.apache.org/
>>> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OFBiz
>>> http://www.les7arts.com/assist/ArgumentaireOFBiz.htm
>>>
>>> The 1st is obvious, the 2d I frequently garden and I'm happy to see it there, the 3d was a page I wrote in 2005, and is a free
>>> translation (with a lot of changes and adaptation through the years) from an old Automation Group site page. Something is
>>> missing in
>>> this document, the point 1. It's now months that I want to write something about that. Because I believe it's why so much
>>> projects
>>> based on OFBiz did not evolve with OFBiz and became legacy. This is bad for 2 reasons: these projects will not benefit of all
>>> the
>>> enhancements OFBiz is able to give them, OFBiz does not benefit of potential long term contributors. From my experience, few
>>> projects succeed in this way (even VAR projects) because they neglict this paramount point!
>>>
>>> There are already a lot of things spreaded in the wiki. I will try, when I will get a chance, to make something more
>>> comprehensible
>>> for new comers (I prefer this word than newbies or even worse noobs ;o)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I agree there is a lot in the Wiki, but it isn't very accessible.  A lot
>> of people (me included) are asking questions here, and being referred to
>> things they couldn't find on their own.  We need to fix that, and I'm
>> happy to help organize the wiki with some kind of index if I can.
>>
>> Just to give old hands an idea what newbies (and PHBs) like me struggle
>> with, and need to find easily:
>>
>> I am an OFBiz newbie, so that is the first issue.  But it isn't the only
>> one.  I am an SVN newbie too.  And a Java newbie.  And an XML newbie.
>> Haven't tried Eclipse yet.  Not to mention half a dozen other new
>> technologies here.
>>
>> Java is just another language, I have learned about 20 to date, so that
>> isn't that big an issue, but there are a lot of libraries out there to
>> learn.
>> XML is close enough to HTML that I don't feel completely at sea, but I
>> don't know where all the DTDs are.  I see seed and configuration data
>> and the like stored in XML files which to me seems a very verbose and
>> error-prone way to edit/change data, but I assume there are reasons for
>> this that I don't understand yet.  Generally when I have seen XML files
>> used for configuration (like /etc/cups/printers.conf) you don't edit
>> those by hand, there is a GUI for that.
>>
>> Subversion seems simple enough in the classic shared-codebase scenario,
>> but if there is a tutorial out there on "How to update from a shared
>> repository without clobbering your local modifications" I haven't seen
>> it.  As a PHB relying on a moving SVN target, I need to know how to keep
>> my local changes intact while updating code.
>>
>> Very little about OFBiz seems intuitive.  To some extent I know that is
>> a result of necessary complexity, like Party/Party Groups and related
>> data.  No one thinks that way in business, or even in law (I was a
>> lawyer in a previous life), we all think about People and Organizations,
>> but terms are relatively easy to learn, at least compared to alien
>> concepts like workflows and virtual products.  But I still don't know
>> yet how to get standard Sales Leads (source, date, name, address, phone,
>> comments) into my OFBiz database in an automated fashion.
>>
>> The code is currently structured into Framework (which I think I
>> understand, though the edges are fuzzy to more than just me),
>> Applications (which seem to be subject-related, though OFBiz itself is
>> an application), Special Purpose (an odd catch-all, since everything has
>> a Special Purpose, but like Steve Martin in The Jerk, we might not know
>> what it is yet) and Hot-Deploy (which really seems to mean "local").
>>
>> The whole update process makes me nervous.  I don't know what quality
>> controls are applied to code that is merged into the base, or whether
>> database design changes break things.  With perl for example, an
>> automated test suite runs every time I update a library, so I get a warm
>> fuzzy feeling that the update hasn't broken anything I use.  DBMS code
>> is traditionally the easiest to break, and at the same time production
>> systems have huge data investments, and a day outage due to a DBMS
>> change is NOT an option.  What does OFBiz do to ensure that doesn't
>> happen?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Sorry for he long post, I have this in mind for a long time...
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

[Jacques Le Roux-2-2]

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

> Jaques, I think you have hit the nail on the head.  Specific responses
> follow.
>
> Sat, 2010-02-06 at 17:02 +0100, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> From: "David E Jones" <[hidden email]>
>> > 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.
>>
>> That's not exactly what I meant. Who are those end-users I was trying to talk about?  Technical aware persons, with influence in
>> companies but not enough time to look into every technical details (CTO, CIO, etc.). So they make (or at least help to make) very
>> important decisions (financial decision, I mean) for the future of their entreprises. And for that try to get as much as possible
>> information when making a choice between competitors. It's already a good news when they are considering OSS. Then chances are
>> they
>> will compare projects. This is the target I was talking about. I personnaly think that a *huge* effort as been already done in
>> OFBIz
>> to give them ways to make their choice. I was simply saying that we should try to continue this effort. Not only some persons as
>> it
>> was some years ago, when the knowledge was not as shared as today. For instance the effort you made, David, on the Framework
>> *open
>> and (now) free* documentation was certainly one the most important the project benefited. But I'm not quite sure (euphemism ;o)
>> all
>> the decision-makers (or helpers) take the time to read it thourougly and to understand all subtleties while evaluating OFBiz. So
>> now, what we need is a satellite map (kind of marketing) to facilitate the decisions of these guys and, as much as possible, to
>> make
>> them happy to choice OFBiz :o)
>
> I admit it, I am one of these PHBs.  I am looking to implement OFBiz as
> a long-term solution.  But the learning curve is steep.  Someone earlier
> today estimated 300-400 hours.  That's 10 weeks, and I would submit
> there ain't a PHB alive, tech-savvy or not, who that has that kind of
> time.  Hiring it is expensive and assumes availability, which is
> uncertain.

I agree with the answer Chris made you earlier. But bypassing the applications power is not ideal to me, and should not be
recommended... for long term solutions...

> We need more ease of use OOTB (including clearer and more concise docs),
> so that (as they say in perl) the easy  stuff is easy, and the hard
> stuff is possible.

I saw your try, when I will get some time (and my high rate connection back, grrrr) I will review, complete and link. For instance
did you know that we have a maturing Glossary?
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Glossary

>> Some themes I foresee:
>>
>> 1) Why you should use the trunk instead of a release,
>> 2) Why OFBIz is here to stay, independtly of the people working currently on it
>> 3) Why... ok I'm lazy today (actually more knackered but who cares ;o)...
>>
>> The theme 1 is one of the most important to me because it distinguishs OFBiz from its competitors, even VAR projects based on
>> OFBiz.
>> It allows to follow the projects and, if inclined to, to contribute to it and to make it grow along your own needs.
>
> As a PHB, themes 1 and 2 are really important to me, and I still don't
> know that I made the "right" decision.  I just hope so.  Don't know how
> you can satisfy me on point 2, but I watched a long time before pulling
> the trigger (and I still haven't pulled the trigger except in devoting
> resources to get into it).

Quickly : because it's a real community based project backed by Apache. A company may disappear (look at what is happening to even
Sun, MySQL, etc.) Apache and OFBiz community is less prone to disappear

> On theme 1, I seemed to read, and was also told by experienced people
> that I should be on 9.04, as it is more stable than trunk.  But I now
> really doubt that should be the case, for several reasons.
>
> 1) development is progressing at a rapid rate, perhaps too rapid, and
> the 9.04 code base is 10 months old now.

Too rapid, you are kidding ;o), or you mean not controlled enough maybe? I will later try to explain, as clearly as possible, why
the trunk is the right solution. If you search in the ML you will already find many good explanations by David.

> 2) Bug fixes don't generally get applied to the releases, only to trunk.

Wrong, as a commiter I always apply bug fixes 1st in trunk then backport them in last releases (and even if possible in older
releases). And we all (commiters) try to do so (sometimes some seem to forget though)

> 3) It seems from discussions here that the underlying model doesn't
> usually change much, and while code is being added, it isn't often
> breaking prior code.  This is good.

Right, in case it changes, there is always this page
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/Revisions+Requiring+Data+Migration

> So if I want to contribute (and I do, though I doubt my ability to
> contribute much) I gather I should really be on trunk.

Good decision! I will explain later why, you can already look for David's answers in archives (MLs archives I mean)

>> When you Google for "OFBiz" in France you get these pages in this order
>> http://ofbiz.apache.org/
>> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_OFBiz
>> http://www.les7arts.com/assist/ArgumentaireOFBiz.htm
>>
>> The 1st is obvious, the 2d I frequently garden and I'm happy to see it there, the 3d was a page I wrote in 2005, and is a free
>> translation (with a lot of changes and adaptation through the years) from an old Automation Group site page. Something is missing
>> in
>> this document, the point 1. It's now months that I want to write something about that. Because I believe it's why so much
>> projects
>> based on OFBiz did not evolve with OFBiz and became legacy. This is bad for 2 reasons: these projects will not benefit of all the
>> enhancements OFBiz is able to give them, OFBiz does not benefit of potential long term contributors. From my experience, few
>> projects succeed in this way (even VAR projects) because they neglict this paramount point!
>>
>> There are already a lot of things spreaded in the wiki. I will try, when I will get a chance, to make something more
>> comprehensible
>> for new comers (I prefer this word than newbies or even worse noobs ;o)

I will let you know when I will have written this article (actually only a new paragraph) For the moment it's only in French but I
will make an English version (I'd love to still have the original from Automation Group)

> I agree there is a lot in the Wiki, but it isn't very accessible.  A lot
> of people (me included) are asking questions here, and being referred to
> things they couldn't find on their own.  We need to fix that, and I'm
> happy to help organize the wiki with some kind of index if I can.

The FAQ is useful (it was done with the same idea in mind), but I agree limited and mostly technical

> Just to give old hands an idea what newbies (and PHBs) like me struggle
> with, and need to find easily:
>
> I am an OFBiz newbie, so that is the first issue.  But it isn't the only
> one.  I am an SVN newbie too.  And a Java newbie.  And an XML newbie.
> Haven't tried Eclipse yet.  Not to mention half a dozen other new
> technologies here.

Eclipse is frigthening when you begin but some days of use and it's ok (some months you begin to see its power, years are needed to
get the best from it).
With tools around ( Tortoise on Windows makes miracles, Subclipse is not bad and complementary) SVN is not a problem.
For XML I'd recommend to use a goods tool like Oxygen but now there are also good capabilities OOTB in Eclipse
Java is not hard to use when you don't dive in details, else follow Adam's advices on dev ML :o)

> Java is just another language, I have learned about 20 to date, so that
> isn't that big an issue, but there are a lot of libraries out there to
> learn.

Yes and a jargon :/ But don't be afraid, as long as you don't dive in technical and architectural details, you don't have to worry
about them

> XML is close enough to HTML that I don't feel completely at sea, but I
> don't know where all the DTDs are.

Did you miss to read this page?
http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Documentation+Index

>I see seed and configuration data
> and the like stored in XML files which to me seems a very verbose and
> error-prone way to edit/change data, but I assume there are reasons for
> this that I don't understand yet.  Generally when I have seen XML files
> used for configuration (like /etc/cups/printers.conf) you don't edit
> those by hand, there is a GUI for that.

You will have to have you hand dirty, but with XML completion (Oxygen does a good job as I said) it's not as hard as it may look at
1st glance.

> Subversion seems simple enough in the classic shared-codebase scenario,
> but if there is a tutorial out there on "How to update from a shared
> repository without clobbering your local modifications" I haven't seen
> it.  As a PHB relying on a moving SVN target, I need to know how to keep
> my local changes intact while updating code.

There are strategies for that, look for "vendor" in wiki. But as I said (not clearly yet), using hot-deploy is the real thing...

> Very little about OFBiz seems intuitive.  To some extent I know that is
> a result of necessary complexity, like Party/Party Groups and related
> data.  No one thinks that way in business, or even in law (I was a
> lawyer in a previous life), we all think about People and Organizations,

Silverton's concepts...

> but terms are relatively easy to learn, at least compared to alien
> concepts like workflows and virtual products.  But I still don't know
> yet how to get standard Sales Leads (source, date, name, address, phone,
> comments) into my OFBiz database in an automated fashion.
>
> The code is currently structured into Framework (which I think I
> understand, though the edges are fuzzy to more than just me),
> Applications (which seem to be subject-related, though OFBiz itself is
> an application), Special Purpose (an odd catch-all, since everything has
> a Special Purpose,

As concepts,
Applications correspond rougly to the Silverstion's Book 1
Special Purpose Applications correspond to the Silverstion's Book 2+3

>but like Steve Martin in The Jerk, we might not know
> what it is yet) and Hot-Deploy (which really seems to mean "local").
>
> The whole update process makes me nervous.  I don't know what quality
> controls are applied to code that is merged into the base, or whether
> database design changes break things.  With perl for example, an
> automated test suite runs every time I update a library, so I get a warm
> fuzzy feeling that the update hasn't broken anything I use.

http://ci.apache.org/waterfall?show_events=false&branch=&builder=ofbiz-trunk&reload=none

>DBMS code
> is traditionally the easiest to break, and at the same time production
> systems have huge data investments, and a day outage due to a DBMS
> change is NOT an option.  What does OFBiz do to ensure that doesn't
> happen?

http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/Revisions+Requiring+Data+Migration

HTH

Jacques

>
>
>
>
>> Sorry for he long post, I have this in mind for a long time...
>>
>> Jacques
>
>
> --
> Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
> RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.
>

[Chris Snow-3]

Hi Jacques,

In my comment about the lack of overall system documentation, I meant
about the business processes behind the components.  Technical
documentation is actually quite good for ofbiz.

Cheers,

Chris

Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]>
> [Snip]
>> For this you need a good understanding of the overall system, for
>> which there is no documentation except the universal data models.
>
> Wrong, from an OFBiz technical POV:
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/MoBr
> See  AdvancedFrameworkTranscription20060824.pdf in attachment
> This document is as important to me as the Silvertson's data model.
> It's free and open (see .doc)!
> Related http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/I4Br
>
> If you want to have a quick grasp, the Pack book is good enough (even
> if based on R4.0). I was a reviewer, and I know well Ruppert,
> who actually wrote the book. Jonathon gave up, but as he began he got
> to keep his name 1st.
>
> HTH
>
> Jacques

[bsreekanth]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.