OFBiz › OFBiz - User

[OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

14 messages Options

Rohit Rai

[OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

Nice to hear that Si Chen.

But I still have some questions. Surely I would like the Ofbiz Project not to be forked.

But how will this be different than the current model where in ofbiz.org maintains the project and you make a weekly release available.

I particular will it really help to make this wonderful <Open for Business> package <Open for all>? Will you add new features to Sequoia ERP? May be things that people ask for. Will you have people apart from your very own organisation. i.e. openstrategies work on it and join it as developers. And just on the way as my discussion was going on with David. Are we going to get new things for Ofbiz here, may be technologies and features that are still not fully stable or is it going to stick to the Business Releases i.e. what some people like to say Production Quality Releases.

I don't know may be some people take wrong meaning of my words cause I do use strong sentences. But my approach is genuine and may be my thinking outlandish but it does look out at future . . . I want Ofbiz to compete in every arena. I don't know why I could have always gone with Compiere which too has wide following. I never fell in for Ofbiz due to its technology or features. I fell in love with the name and the Initial Opennes That I felt was built around the project. Staying here I think may be I was not made for this world. May be working on other open source projects makes me think like that or may be I only think like that.

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Si Chen-2

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

Rohit and anyone else reading this -

1. The weekly release before was a build test and convenience for
developers. They are not releases in the sense that there is no way to
patch and stabilize them. Each week's build has a series of commits to
OFBiz, some of which are bug fixes, others additional features.

The idea behind Sequoia is to have a series of versions with different
features and a series of releases within each version which are
increasingly more stable around the core feature set of that version.
For example, right now release 0.8.0 is deemed to be reasonably stable
in my opinion. In about a month, hopefully, we'll have release 0.8.1
which should have gone through more QA and be much more production
ready. Then, over time and with other contributions, we'll get to 0.8.2
and 0.8.3, etc. These will be more stable and robust versions of the
same basic core feature set.

To get a new set of features and capture the full benefits of OFBiz
development, new version, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 2.0, etc. will be created
over time. This is so that users who are happy with a core feature set
can stay with the version they started with, but with more stability.
Users who want new features can then upgrade to new versions.

2. So, yes, all the new features of OFBiz will go into Sequoia.

3. The idea behind it is basic to open source in general--reduce the
cost of maintenance through collaboration and sharing. At this point, I
and others have felt that we're all taking these snapshots and then
going through QA to arrive at a feature set we want. Then we're
building out from that starting point. What if we could share a
starting point? That would reduce the cost of delivering an OFBiz-based
solution much more easily.

4. New features and development should all go into OFBiz. At the risk
of repeating myself, this is not a fork of the project.

5. I would be happy to have new people join Sequoia as developers. If
you're working with Sequoia and send in patches extensively, I will be
the one to ask you to be a "committer." Be aware though, that as a
result of (3), we're not looking to commit new features which are
incompatible with OFBiz. Therefore, your role would be more like that
of a Debian maintainer than a Linux kernel developer.

6. I also like OFBiz for the collaborative and open nature of the
project and hope that we can make it work for more people. Hopefully
this release initiative will help in that regard.

Si

Rohit Rai wrote:

> Nice to hear that Si Chen.
>
> But I still have some questions. Surely I would like the Ofbiz Project
> not to be forked.
>
> But how will this be different than the current model where in
> ofbiz.org <http://ofbiz.org> maintains the project and you make a
> weekly release available.
>
> I particular will it really help to make this wonderful <Open for
> Business> package <Open for all>? Will you add new features to
> *Sequoia ERP? *May be things that people ask for. Will you have people
> apart from your very own organisation. i.e. openstrategies work on it
> and join it as developers. And just on the way as my discussion was
> going on with David. Are we going to get new things for Ofbiz here,
> may be technologies and features that are still not fully stable or is
> it going to stick to the Business Releases i.e. what some people like
> to say Production Quality Releases.
>
> I don't know may be some people take wrong meaning of my words cause I
> do use strong sentences. But my approach is genuine and may be my
> thinking outlandish but it does look out at future . . . I want Ofbiz
> to compete in every arena. I don't know why I could have always gone
> with Compiere which too has wide following. I never fell in for Ofbiz
> due to its technology or features. I fell in love with the name and
> the Initial Opennes That I felt was built around the project. Staying
> here I think may be I was not made for this world. May be working on
> other open source projects makes me think like that or may be I only
> think like that.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Daniel Kunkel

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

Hi Si

First, it's a real joy to watch all the great contributions you are
making to this project... not to detract from anyone else, but Wow...
This, the accounting with large time and money investments, your weekly
blog, your tutorials, etc. Thanks from all of us!!!

Just thinking...

I wonder if it would not be easier to support the Sequoia builds as
branches in the OFBiz SVN proper, or with that wonderful sounding SVK
tool Ean mentioned rather than across in a completely "different
project."

I think would force clarity that this is not a fork, and it would
support a more natural flow for all improvements to go to OFBiz's latest
SVN rather than periodically being forced to backport from Sequoia to
OFBiz.

I don't want to load David or Andy down with any more administrative
tasks, but it seems worth considering if it helps avoid additional
ongoing work for you.

---

By the way, do you have any feeling for how long old versions will be
supported and upgraded after newer versions are released? In other
words, how many versions do you intend to keep up to date? For example,
lets say version 0.8.3 is working great but missing some major
functionality so we start 0.9.0. Do we keep developing the 0.8 strain
for ___ time (say 1 more year), till ____ version (say 0.9.1 or 1.0.0)
or does development stop on 0.8 as soon as 0.9 is released?

Is it worth trying to install a system right at the start that will
track how many people are still using any particular version, so
development can stop once the population moves on?

Thanks

On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 09:56 -0700, Si Chen wrote:

> Rohit and anyone else reading this -
>
> 1. The weekly release before was a build test and convenience for
> developers. They are not releases in the sense that there is no way to
> patch and stabilize them. Each week's build has a series of commits to
> OFBiz, some of which are bug fixes, others additional features.
>
> The idea behind Sequoia is to have a series of versions with different
> features and a series of releases within each version which are
> increasingly more stable around the core feature set of that version.
> For example, right now release 0.8.0 is deemed to be reasonably stable
> in my opinion. In about a month, hopefully, we'll have release 0.8.1
> which should have gone through more QA and be much more production
> ready. Then, over time and with other contributions, we'll get to 0.8.2
> and 0.8.3, etc. These will be more stable and robust versions of the
> same basic core feature set.
>
> To get a new set of features and capture the full benefits of OFBiz
> development, new version, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 2.0, etc. will be created
> over time. This is so that users who are happy with a core feature set
> can stay with the version they started with, but with more stability.
> Users who want new features can then upgrade to new versions.
>
> 2. So, yes, all the new features of OFBiz will go into Sequoia.
>
> 3. The idea behind it is basic to open source in general--reduce the
> cost of maintenance through collaboration and sharing. At this point, I
> and others have felt that we're all taking these snapshots and then
> going through QA to arrive at a feature set we want. Then we're
> building out from that starting point. What if we could share a
> starting point? That would reduce the cost of delivering an OFBiz-based
> solution much more easily.
>
> 4. New features and development should all go into OFBiz. At the risk
> of repeating myself, this is not a fork of the project.
>
> 5. I would be happy to have new people join Sequoia as developers. If
> you're working with Sequoia and send in patches extensively, I will be
> the one to ask you to be a "committer." Be aware though, that as a
> result of (3), we're not looking to commit new features which are
> incompatible with OFBiz. Therefore, your role would be more like that
> of a Debian maintainer than a Linux kernel developer.
>
> 6. I also like OFBiz for the collaborative and open nature of the
> project and hope that we can make it work for more people. Hopefully
> this release initiative will help in that regard.
>
> Si
>
> Rohit Rai wrote:
>
> > Nice to hear that Si Chen.
> >
> > But I still have some questions. Surely I would like the Ofbiz Project
> > not to be forked.
> >
> > But how will this be different than the current model where in
> > ofbiz.org <http://ofbiz.org> maintains the project and you make a
> > weekly release available.
> >
> > I particular will it really help to make this wonderful <Open for
> > Business> package <Open for all>? Will you add new features to
> > *Sequoia ERP? *May be things that people ask for. Will you have people
> > apart from your very own organisation. i.e. openstrategies work on it
> > and join it as developers. And just on the way as my discussion was
> > going on with David. Are we going to get new things for Ofbiz here,
> > may be technologies and features that are still not fully stable or is
> > it going to stick to the Business Releases i.e. what some people like
> > to say Production Quality Releases.
> >
> > I don't know may be some people take wrong meaning of my words cause I
> > do use strong sentences. But my approach is genuine and may be my
> > thinking outlandish but it does look out at future . . . I want Ofbiz
> > to compete in every arena. I don't know why I could have always gone
> > with Compiere which too has wide following. I never fell in for Ofbiz
> > due to its technology or features. I fell in love with the name and
> > the Initial Opennes That I felt was built around the project. Staying
> > here I think may be I was not made for this world. May be working on
> > other open source projects makes me think like that or may be I only
> > think like that.
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Users mailing list
> >[hidden email]
> >http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Rohit Rai

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Rohit Rai

1. That point is a great plan. It comes out really open on the person who is using something what he likes and rejects out what he doesn't. Its Gr*

2., 3. and 4. I think I was not able to put up myself right on that point. I wanted to ask that whether this project will include features not present in Ofbiz. I mean certain applications not affecting the core but yes definitely useful and not yet approved for inclusion in the main Ofbiz. Something like beta apps. I certainly never meant forking. Just the core remains same with additional features. Once these apps are ready and main Ofbiz team thinks ready for inclusion in ofbiz they can be put upstream. So I wanted to know whther we can make certain provisions for it. May be a seperate series if you want to keep your original things clean. Like "EVEN are stable" and "ODD are testing red hot on the edge features" may be all "ODD" features don't even make up to the "EVEN" streams. Something like Linux Development Model. If you don't plan to make any provisions for that please let me know so that we can proceed with a plan to make a "On the Edge" Package of Ofbiz. Following your model we will incorporate all new things and ideas that come in and after their development and establishment its upto the Ofbiz team to incorporate it in them main stream. Even if it doesn't people have the option of continuing to use the feature by getting it from this package. Everyone please let me know if this is not suitable to anyone of us. I mean everyone, newbies vetrans alike!

5 i too believe in that. The kernel remains untouched Apps can be made!

6. Here I was again not very clear. Initially I felt Ofbiz was much more open and welcoming than compeire but now I feel most of the people here is running their own race and not caring about or even pondering on what ideas others can bring. Neither they care to atleast participate in discussions and express their views. I hope it improves with this release if you make the QA procedure transperent and encourage contributions for expansion of Ofbiz not restricting it.

I hope this distribution be a wonderful thing Si.

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Si Chen-2

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Daniel Kunkel

Daniel,

Thanks for your encouragement.

We've just set up a separate repository for now (it was simpler given
the other things we have here), but at some point, maybe it would be a
good idea to do it as a branch.

As for support - the great news is that this is open source. In theory,
as long as there are users and somebody willing to review/commit
patches, support will be available. In practice, it'll depend on if
there are users and, more importantly, enough people to review/commit
patches. We'll just have to see as time goes.

Si

Daniel Kunkel wrote:

>Hi Si
>
>First, it's a real joy to watch all the great contributions you are
>making to this project... not to detract from anyone else, but Wow...
>This, the accounting with large time and money investments, your weekly
>blog, your tutorials, etc. Thanks from all of us!!!
>
>Just thinking...
>
>I wonder if it would not be easier to support the Sequoia builds as
>branches in the OFBiz SVN proper, or with that wonderful sounding SVK
>tool Ean mentioned rather than across in a completely "different
>project."
>
>I think would force clarity that this is not a fork, and it would
>support a more natural flow for all improvements to go to OFBiz's latest
>SVN rather than periodically being forced to backport from Sequoia to
>OFBiz.
>
>I don't want to load David or Andy down with any more administrative
>tasks, but it seems worth considering if it helps avoid additional
>ongoing work for you.
>
>---
>
>By the way, do you have any feeling for how long old versions will be
>supported and upgraded after newer versions are released? In other
>words, how many versions do you intend to keep up to date? For example,
>lets say version 0.8.3 is working great but missing some major
>functionality so we start 0.9.0. Do we keep developing the 0.8 strain
>for ___ time (say 1 more year), till ____ version (say 0.9.1 or 1.0.0)
>or does development stop on 0.8 as soon as 0.9 is released?
>
>Is it worth trying to install a system right at the start that will
>track how many people are still using any particular version, so
>development can stop once the population moves on?
>
>Thanks
>
>
>
>On Wed, 2005-08-24 at 09:56 -0700, Si Chen wrote:
>
>
>>Rohit and anyone else reading this -
>>
>>1. The weekly release before was a build test and convenience for
>>developers. They are not releases in the sense that there is no way to
>>patch and stabilize them. Each week's build has a series of commits to
>>OFBiz, some of which are bug fixes, others additional features.
>>
>>The idea behind Sequoia is to have a series of versions with different
>>features and a series of releases within each version which are
>>increasingly more stable around the core feature set of that version.
>>For example, right now release 0.8.0 is deemed to be reasonably stable
>>in my opinion. In about a month, hopefully, we'll have release 0.8.1
>>which should have gone through more QA and be much more production
>>ready. Then, over time and with other contributions, we'll get to 0.8.2
>>and 0.8.3, etc. These will be more stable and robust versions of the
>>same basic core feature set.
>>
>>To get a new set of features and capture the full benefits of OFBiz
>>development, new version, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 2.0, etc. will be created
>>over time. This is so that users who are happy with a core feature set
>>can stay with the version they started with, but with more stability.
>>Users who want new features can then upgrade to new versions.
>>
>>2. So, yes, all the new features of OFBiz will go into Sequoia.
>>
>>3. The idea behind it is basic to open source in general--reduce the
>>cost of maintenance through collaboration and sharing. At this point, I
>>and others have felt that we're all taking these snapshots and then
>>going through QA to arrive at a feature set we want. Then we're
>>building out from that starting point. What if we could share a
>>starting point? That would reduce the cost of delivering an OFBiz-based
>>solution much more easily.
>>
>>4. New features and development should all go into OFBiz. At the risk
>>of repeating myself, this is not a fork of the project.
>>
>>5. I would be happy to have new people join Sequoia as developers. If
>>you're working with Sequoia and send in patches extensively, I will be
>>the one to ask you to be a "committer." Be aware though, that as a
>>result of (3), we're not looking to commit new features which are
>>incompatible with OFBiz. Therefore, your role would be more like that
>>of a Debian maintainer than a Linux kernel developer.
>>
>>6. I also like OFBiz for the collaborative and open nature of the
>>project and hope that we can make it work for more people. Hopefully
>>this release initiative will help in that regard.
>>
>>Si
>>
>>Rohit Rai wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Nice to hear that Si Chen.
>>>
>>>But I still have some questions. Surely I would like the Ofbiz Project
>>>not to be forked.
>>>
>>>But how will this be different than the current model where in
>>>ofbiz.org <http://ofbiz.org> maintains the project and you make a
>>>weekly release available.
>>>
>>>I particular will it really help to make this wonderful <Open for
>>>Business> package <Open for all>? Will you add new features to
>>>*Sequoia ERP? *May be things that people ask for. Will you have people
>>>apart from your very own organisation. i.e. openstrategies work on it
>>>and join it as developers. And just on the way as my discussion was
>>>going on with David. Are we going to get new things for Ofbiz here,
>>>may be technologies and features that are still not fully stable or is
>>>it going to stick to the Business Releases i.e. what some people like
>>>to say Production Quality Releases.
>>>
>>>I don't know may be some people take wrong meaning of my words cause I
>>>do use strong sentences. But my approach is genuine and may be my
>>>thinking outlandish but it does look out at future . . . I want Ofbiz
>>>to compete in every arena. I don't know why I could have always gone
>>>with Compiere which too has wide following. I never fell in for Ofbiz
>>>due to its technology or features. I fell in love with the name and
>>>the Initial Opennes That I felt was built around the project. Staying
>>>here I think may be I was not made for this world. May be working on
>>>other open source projects makes me think like that or may be I only
>>>think like that.
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Users mailing list
>>>[hidden email]
>>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Users mailing list
>>[hidden email]
>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Si Chen-2

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Rohit Rai

I think for newer features or beta applications the main branch is
really best. We really have some great developers in the OFBiz
community, and if you're developing a new feature, it'd be best to get
their comments and suggestions.

As for "running their own race" and "not caring about or even pondering
on what ideas others can bring" -- Why do you have this impression? I
guess I've not found that personally to be true. I actually felt I've
learned a lot from the existing developers, and they've brought me into
the group from a very novice user.

Si

Rohit Rai wrote:

> 1. That point is a great plan. It comes out really open on the person
> who is using something what he likes and rejects out what he doesn't.
> Its Gr*
>
> 2., 3. and 4. I think I was not able to put up myself right on that
> point. I wanted to ask that whether this project will include features
> not present in Ofbiz. I mean certain applications not affecting the
> core but yes definitely useful and not yet approved for inclusion in
> the main Ofbiz. Something like beta apps. I certainly never meant
> forking. Just the core remains same with additional features. Once
> these apps are ready and main Ofbiz team thinks ready for inclusion in
> ofbiz they can be put upstream. So I wanted to know whther we can make
> certain provisions for it. May be a seperate series if you want to
> keep your original things clean. Like "EVEN are stable" and "ODD are
> testing red hot on the edge features" may be all "ODD" features don't
> even make up to the "EVEN" streams. Something like Linux Development
> Model. If you don't plan to make any provisions for that please let me
> know so that we can proceed with a plan to make a "On the Edge"
> Package of Ofbiz. Following your model we will incorporate all new
> things and ideas that come in and after their development and
> establishment its upto the Ofbiz team to incorporate it in them main
> stream. Even if it doesn't people have the option of continuing to use
> the feature by getting it from this package. *Everyone please let me
> know if this is not suitable to anyone of us. I mean everyone, newbies
> vetrans alike!*
>
> 5 i too believe in that. The kernel remains untouched Apps can be made!
>
> 6. Here I was again not very clear. Initially I felt Ofbiz was much
> more open and welcoming than compeire but now I feel most of the
> people here is running their own race and not caring about or even
> pondering on what ideas others can bring. Neither they care to atleast
> participate in discussions and express their views. I hope it improves
> with this release if you make the QA procedure transperent and
> encourage contributions for expansion of Ofbiz not restricting it.
>
> I hope this distribution be a wonderful thing Si.
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Matt Penner

RE: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Si Chen-2

Love the idea, but ... I would second the idea of getting the stable
releases and patches on the current OFBiz svn as soon as possible. This
would help the confusion, which there is already too much of.

I'm also questioning the new name. "Sequoia" has nothing to do with the
OFBiz name and sounds like an entirely different product. From a marketing
standpoint, I think this is a wrong approach. What's your motivation in the
name scheme?

As for work effort, when a patch is made, I would encourage patch makers to
try to take the time to patch the stable build at the same time. For minor
patches this most likely will require very little change.

All in all, I love the whole idea.

Thanks,
Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of Si Chen
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 3:20 PM
To: OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion
Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

Daniel,

Thanks for your encouragement.

We've just set up a separate repository for now (it was simpler given
the other things we have here), but at some point, maybe it would be a
good idea to do it as a branch.

As for support - the great news is that this is open source. In theory,
as long as there are users and somebody willing to review/commit
patches, support will be available. In practice, it'll depend on if
there are users and, more importantly, enough people to review/commit
patches. We'll just have to see as time goes.

Si

Daniel Kunkel wrote:

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Matt Penner

RE: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Si Chen-2

I had a slightly different idea on new features.

I have two takes on "features".

If a feature is a full blown app, in the sense of Party Manager, Order
Manager, etc, then it should be developed in it's own branch, or svn server.
It should be worked on by the group of community members that have
experience/interest in its development.

Those users who want to use it should be able to download the latest release
or latest revision (as they see fit), add it to their OFBiz directory, and
change their component-load.xml file.

Plain and simple.

The new Plumtree app is taking this approach, and I suspect this is really
the approach of most developers, however the work is rarely published for
public use.

For minor features in the main framework and core apps, well, sorry but
here's my rant.

Hopefully the new Release project will take care of this but...

I almost wish that new features were kept out of the main build until they
were at a release stage.

I talked about this at the conference with a few people and I found I wasn't
alone. It seemed that several times when I found an option that wasn't
working; I'd look in the logs, look in the code, read the docs/wiki, and
then finally ask the community. Finally I'd get the response "that feature
isn't finished yet."

This had to be one of the most frustrating things. I had lost hours and
hours for no reason debugging code that never worked, or existed, in the
first place.

While sometimes these were minor inconveniences, other times these were
large issues. It would be nice if work in progress was not included in the
main build, or at the very least well documented that it was a work in
progress.

OK, that's the end if my rant.

Thanks,
Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
On Behalf Of Si Chen
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 3:26 PM
To: OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion
Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

I think for newer features or beta applications the main branch is
really best. We really have some great developers in the OFBiz
community, and if you're developing a new feature, it'd be best to get
their comments and suggestions.

As for "running their own race" and "not caring about or even pondering
on what ideas others can bring" -- Why do you have this impression? I
guess I've not found that personally to be true. I actually felt I've
learned a lot from the existing developers, and they've brought me into
the group from a very novice user.

Si

Rohit Rai wrote:

Rohit Rai

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Rohit Rai

Si Chen Wrote:

As for "running their own race" and "not caring about or even pondering
on what ideas others can bring" -- Why do you have this impression? I
guess I've not found that personally to be true. I actually felt I've
learned a lot from the existing developers, and they've brought me into
the group from a very novice user.

Si,

It is not about helping. I & my developers would not even have been able to work with Ofbiz if it would not have been for the support and also the documentation we got from the Ofbiz team and also the community. But the problem arises when someone for that matter I myself suggest something that is currently not a primary goal for others. Here I suggest that the community atleast expresstheir veiws, not only positive but even negetive things about it. This makes a base for those who are concerned to take up an Idea. That is the true spirit. by "Rat race" I didn't mean being selfish, not at all!

I appologize if I hurt or offended anyone by those words. The community here is gr8. I just also want it to be open and expressive.

Regards,

Rohit

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Andrew Sykes

RE: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Matt Penner

Matt,

On the subject of the name "Sequoia" - It's a type of tree, so quite a
nice metaphor for the OfBiz branch etc...

Also, I'm not sure there needs to be a link between the OfBiz name and
Sequoia - the advantage of keeping the names separate like this is that
OfBiz can continue it's message of aggressive development etc while
allowing Sequoia to take a more friendly approach for the purposes of
corporate adoption etc.

As well as this, I quite like the name :-)

--
Andrew Sykes <[hidden email]>
Sykes Development Ltd

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Si Chen-2

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Rohit Rai

What in particular are you talking about?

I think you're right in general--it would be nice to get more feedback.

Si

Rohit Rai wrote:

> Si Chen Wrote:
>
> As for "running their own race" and "not caring about or even pondering
> on what ideas others can bring" -- Why do you have this impression? I
> guess I've not found that personally to be true. I actually felt I've
> learned a lot from the existing developers, and they've brought me into
> the group from a very novice user.
>
> Si,
>
> It is not about helping. I & my developers would not even have been
> able to work with Ofbiz if it would not have been for the support and
> also the documentation we got from the Ofbiz team and also the
> community. But the problem arises when someone for that matter I
> myself suggest something that is currently not a primary goal for
> others. Here I suggest that the community atleast expresstheir veiws,
> not only positive but even negetive things about it. This makes a base
> for those who are concerned to take up an Idea. That is the true
> spirit. by "Rat race" I didn't mean being selfish, not at all!
>
> I appologize if I hurt or offended anyone by those words. The
> community here is gr8. I just also want it to be open and expressive.
>
> Regards,
> Rohit
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Users mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Rohit Rai

RE: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

In reply to this post by Rohit Rai

I agree totally with that Matt. But my concern is about this,

" I suspect this is really the approach of most developers, however the work is rarely published for public use."

The reason is the developers of the features rarely want to go through a procedure to bring in their *feature*. And for this I want that there should be a place where anyone can simply comein and make their feature available be it a minor feature or a full blown App. The Ofbiz team can then consider what they want to incorporate or reject probably depending on usability, coding standards but above all on community usage and support.

What do all others think???

Regards,

Rohit Rai

Echo IT Labs Pvt. Ltd.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Matt Penner" <[hidden email]>
To: "'OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion'" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 23:40:23 -0700
Subject: RE: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading
I had a slightly different idea on new features.

I have two takes on "features".

If a feature is a full blown app, in the sense of Party Manager, Order
Manager, etc, then it should be developed in it's own branch, or svn server.
It should be worked on by the group of community members that have
experience/interest in its development.

Those users who want to use it should be able to download the latest release
or latest revision (as they see fit), add it to their OFBiz directory, and
change their component-load.xml file.

Plain and simple.

The new Plumtree app is taking this approach, and I suspect this is really
the approach of most developers, however the work is rarely published for
public use.

For minor features in the main framework and core apps, well, sorry but
here's my rant.

Hopefully the new Release project will take care of this but...

I almost wish that new features were kept out of the main build until they
were at a release stage.

I talked about this at the conference with a few people and I found I wasn't
alone. It seemed that several times when I found an option that wasn't
working; I'd look in the logs, look in the code, read the docs/wiki, and
then finally ask the community. Finally I'd get the response "that feature
isn't finished yet."

This had to be one of the most frustrating things. I had lost hours and
hours for no reason debugging code that never worked, or existed, in the
first place.

While sometimes these were minor inconveniences, other times these were
large issues. It would be nice if work in progress was not included in the
main build, or at the very least well documented that it was a work in
progress.

OK, that's the end if my rant.

Thanks,
Matt

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Jacopo Cappellato

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

Hi Rohit,

Rohit Rai wrote:
>
> ...
>
> The reason is the developers of the features rarely want to go through a
> procedure to bring in their *feature*. And for this I want that there
> should be a place where anyone can simply comein and make their feature
> available be it a minor feature or a full blown App. The Ofbiz team can
> then consider what they want to incorporate or reject probably depending
> on usability, coding standards but above all on community usage and
> support.
>

I think that Jira should be used for this.

Jacopo

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

Jacques Le Roux

Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

Administrator

I agree with Jacopo, Jira might be used for suggesting new features and
such, with patches and descriptions of course...

Jacques

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]>
To: "OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - an OFBiz release and upgrading

> Hi Rohit,
>
> Rohit Rai wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > The reason is the developers of the features rarely want to go through a
> > procedure to bring in their *feature*. And for this I want that there
> > should be a place where anyone can simply comein and make their feature
> > available be it a minor feature or a full blown App. The Ofbiz team can
> > then consider what they want to incorporate or reject probably depending
> > on usability, coding standards but above all on community usage and
> > support.
> >
>
> I think that Jira should be used for this.
>
> Jacopo
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users