OFBiz in Canada?
Locked
12345
12345
 
|
On Nov 12, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: > So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? Well, this is true in some ways: the OFBiz user/contributor base is growing every day but apparently the critical mass that will allow it to maintain and implement a good release plan is still not reached. Keep in mind that OFBiz is a big beast and that is why we need a pretty big base: other smaller projects have a better life dealing with releases if their communities are way smaller then the one of OFBiz. > There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable releases and documentation. But without stable releases and documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. Well, this is not true: the user/contributor base is steadily growing and this means that, despite of the lack of a well supported release plan, OFBiz is attracting new users everyday. Kind regards, Jacopo > > > Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to implement a good release plan? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>> >>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate as much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is crazy. >>>> >>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is expensive (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by the users of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release plan. >>>> >>>> Jacopo >>>> >>> >> > |
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Jacques Le Roux
Christopher,
Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it shows another mindset One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode (Review-Then-Commit) For more on this apect you could be interested by http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, only that it's interesting to see how other communities are doing and reactions about that ;o) Jacques From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? > > No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear since > we released 9.04 > And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase even more this curve http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp > > Jacques > >> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable releases and documentation. But without stable releases and >> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. >> >> >> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to implement a good release plan? >>>> >>>> Many thanks, >>>> >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate as much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a >>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is >>>>>> crazy. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the >>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is expensive (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by the users >>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release >>>>> plan. >>>>> >>>>> Jacopo >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > |
|
|
Unrelated: +1 thread hijack :P
Back to the discussed matter: As a programmer, I'd be interested to know more about how I can help. I'm not really used to open-source projects, but I'm going to have to implement this solution for my company. Which is why I want to find other Canadian (preferably Quebec) users, and lend a hand if possible. What would I need to know to participate? Olivier Le 2009-11-12 à 06:20, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > Christopher, > > Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it shows > another mindset > > One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and > pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode (Review- > Then-Commit) > For more on this apect you could be interested by http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html > > To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, > only that it's interesting to see how other communities are doing > and reactions about that ;o) > > Jacques > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? >> >> No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even >> quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear since >> we released 9.04 >> And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase >> even more this curve http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp >> >> Jacques >> >>> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable >>> releases and documentation. But without stable releases and >>> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. >>> >>> >>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to >>>>> implement a good release plan? >>>>> >>>>> Many thanks, >>>>> >>>>> Chris >>>>> >>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate >>>>>>> as much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a >>>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to >>>>>>> use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is >>>>>>> crazy. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make >>>>>> OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the >>>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is >>>>>> expensive (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by >>>>>> the users >>>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants >>>>>> etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release >>>>>> plan. >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > |
|
|
Hi Olivier,
Try this link to give you an idéa: http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Contributors+Best+Practices -André > Unrelated: +1 thread hijack :P > > Back to the discussed matter: > > As a programmer, I'd be interested to know more about how I can help. > I'm not really used to open-source projects, but I'm going to have to > implement this solution for my company. Which is why I want to find > other Canadian (preferably Quebec) users, and lend a hand if possible. > What would I need to know to participate? > > Olivier > > Le 2009-11-12 à 06:20, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > > Christopher, > > > > Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it shows > > another mindset > > > > One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and > > pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode (Review- > > Then-Commit) > > For more on this apect you could be interested by > > http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html > > > > To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, > > only that it's interesting to see how other communities are doing > > and reactions about that ;o) > > > > Jacques > > > > From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> > > > >> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> > >> > >>> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? > >> > >> No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even > >> quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear since > >> we released 9.04 > >> And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase > >> even more this curve http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp > >> > >> Jacques > >> > >>> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable > >>> releases and documentation. But without stable releases and > >>> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. > >>> > >>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: > >>>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... > >>>> > >>>> Jacques > >>>> > >>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> > >>>> > >>>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to > >>>>> implement a good release plan? > >>>>> > >>>>> Many thanks, > >>>>> > >>>>> Chris > >>>>> > >>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > >>>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: > >>>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate > >>>>>>> as much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a > >>>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to > >>>>>>> use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is > >>>>>>> crazy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make > >>>>>> OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the > >>>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. > >>>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is > >>>>>> expensive (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by > >>>>>> the users > >>>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants > >>>>>> etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release > >>>>>> plan. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Jacopo |
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Mr.Zombie
From: "Olivier Tremblay" <[hidden email]> > Unrelated: +1 thread hijack :P Yes, but if you read it all you will find that some ideas there matter and are related to the subject Chris submitted This said, sorry for the thread hijack but it was Chris's actually ;o) Jacques > > Back to the discussed matter: > > As a programmer, I'd be interested to know more about how I can help. I'm not really used to open-source projects, but I'm going > to have to implement this solution for my company. Which is why I want to find other Canadian (preferably Quebec) users, and > lend a hand if possible. What would I need to know to participate? > > Olivier > > Le 2009-11-12 à 06:20, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > >> Christopher, >> >> Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it shows another mindset >> >> One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode >> (Review- Then-Commit) >> For more on this apect you could be interested by http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html >> >> To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, only that it's interesting to see how other communities are >> doing >> and reactions about that ;o) >> >> Jacques >> >> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? >>> >>> No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear >>> since >>> we released 9.04 >>> And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase even more this curve >>> http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>>> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable releases and documentation. But without stable releases and >>>> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. >>>> >>>> >>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to implement a good release plan? >>>>>> >>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Chris >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate as much consulting revenue as possible and not on making >>>>>>>> ofbiz a >>>>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is >>>>>>>> crazy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the >>>>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is expensive (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by the >>>>>>> users >>>>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release >>>>>>> plan. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
Yes, I take the credit for the hijack!
Jacques Le Roux wrote: > > From: "Olivier Tremblay" <[hidden email]> >> Unrelated: +1 thread hijack :P > > Yes, but if you read it all you will find that some ideas there matter > and are related to the subject Chris submitted > > This said, sorry for the thread hijack but it was Chris's actually ;o) > > Jacques > >> >> Back to the discussed matter: >> >> As a programmer, I'd be interested to know more about how I can >> help. I'm not really used to open-source projects, but I'm going to >> have to implement this solution for my company. Which is why I want >> to find other Canadian (preferably Quebec) users, and lend a hand if >> possible. What would I need to know to participate? >> >> Olivier >> >> Le 2009-11-12 à 06:20, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >> >>> Christopher, >>> >>> Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it >>> shows another mindset >>> >>> One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and >>> pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode >>> (Review- Then-Commit) >>> For more on this apect you could be interested by >>> http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html >>> >>> To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, >>> only that it's interesting to see how other communities are doing >>> and reactions about that ;o) >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? >>>> >>>> No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even >>>> quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear since >>>> we released 9.04 >>>> And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase >>>> even more this curve http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>>> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable >>>>> releases and documentation. But without stable releases and >>>>> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to >>>>>>> implement a good release plan? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate >>>>>>>>> as much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a >>>>>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having >>>>>>>>> to use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is >>>>>>>>> crazy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make >>>>>>>> OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the >>>>>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>>>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is >>>>>>>> expensive (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by >>>>>>>> the users >>>>>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants >>>>>>>> etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release >>>>>>>> plan. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > |
|
|
Well, regarding participation, we just had an excellent Talk about
participating in open source - and guess what even more detailed: on ASF - projects here at W-JAX 2009 in Munich. It was especially of interest, since it drew a couple of examples what the motivation of people would be to participate. And you will not be surprised to see that a certain commercial interest is not unusual. However, the argument of "critical mass" being brought up above seems a little vague to me: What is actually the number of comitters / contributors required to switch into a good release plan? Any ideas? Is it dependant on the BUG statistics reported on JIRA? How many are they and how good are we contributors in fixing them? Are we currently building a backlog? Is it for trunk or for releases only? How are bug reports/bugs distributed across components? Is it possibly critical to have a certain number of committers per component? Back to the talk I mentioned: Once I have the slides, I will distribute the link across people (or here) if there is interest. Kind regards Carsten 2009/11/12 Christopher Snow <[hidden email]> > Yes, I take the credit for the hijack! > > > Jacques Le Roux wrote: > >> >> From: "Olivier Tremblay" <[hidden email]> >> >>> Unrelated: +1 thread hijack :P >>> >> >> Yes, but if you read it all you will find that some ideas there matter and >> are related to the subject Chris submitted >> >> This said, sorry for the thread hijack but it was Chris's actually ;o) >> >> Jacques >> >> >>> Back to the discussed matter: >>> >>> As a programmer, I'd be interested to know more about how I can help. >>> I'm not really used to open-source projects, but I'm going to have to >>> implement this solution for my company. Which is why I want to find other >>> Canadian (preferably Quebec) users, and lend a hand if possible. What would >>> I need to know to participate? >>> >>> Olivier >>> >>> Le 2009-11-12 à 06:20, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >>> >>> Christopher, >>>> >>>> Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it shows >>>> another mindset >>>> >>>> One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and >>>> pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode (Review- >>>> Then-Commit) >>>> For more on this apect you could be interested by >>>> http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html >>>> >>>> To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, only >>>> that it's interesting to see how other communities are doing >>>> and reactions about that ;o) >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>> >>>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>> >>>>>> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even >>>>> quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear since >>>>> we released 9.04 >>>>> And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase even >>>>> more this curve http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable releases >>>>>> and documentation. But without stable releases and >>>>>> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to implement >>>>>>>> a good release plan? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate as >>>>>>>>>> much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a >>>>>>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to >>>>>>>>>> use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is >>>>>>>>>> crazy. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make >>>>>>>>> OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the >>>>>>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>>>>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is expensive >>>>>>>>> (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by the users >>>>>>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants >>>>>>>>> etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release >>>>>>>>> plan. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > -- Best Carsten Schinzer Waisenhausstr. 53a 80637 München Germany |
Release strategy and community WAS Re: OFBiz in Canada?
|
|
Hi Carsten,
On Nov 12, 2009, at 2:31 PM, Carsten Schinzer wrote: > Well, regarding participation, we just had an excellent Talk about > participating in open source - and guess what even more detailed: on ASF - > projects here at W-JAX 2009 in Munich. > > It was especially of interest, since it drew a couple of examples what the > motivation of people would be to participate. And you will not be surprised > to see that a certain commercial interest is not unusual. > > However, the argument of "critical mass" being brought up above seems a > little vague to me: What is actually the number of comitters / contributors > required to switch into a good release plan? Yes it is vague for sure, and it is based on a reality check: OFbiz's community is active, OFBiz is widely used, a lot of new features are freely contributed everyday but very few people or companies seem interested in contributing time to maintain a release plan. This is why I said this. We can probably try do something to better use the efforts of the ones willing to help maintain releases, ideas are welcome. Kind regards, Jacopo > Any ideas? Is it dependant on > the BUG statistics reported on JIRA? How many are they and how good are we > contributors in fixing them? Are we currently building a backlog? Is it for > trunk or for releases only? How are bug reports/bugs distributed across > components? Is it possibly critical to have a certain number of committers > per component? > > Back to the talk I mentioned: > Once I have the slides, I will distribute the link across people (or here) > if there is interest. > > Kind regards > > > Carsten > > > 2009/11/12 Christopher Snow <[hidden email]> > >> Yes, I take the credit for the hijack! >> >> >> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >>> >>> From: "Olivier Tremblay" <[hidden email]> >>> >>>> Unrelated: +1 thread hijack :P >>>> >>> >>> Yes, but if you read it all you will find that some ideas there matter and >>> are related to the subject Chris submitted >>> >>> This said, sorry for the thread hijack but it was Chris's actually ;o) >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>>> Back to the discussed matter: >>>> >>>> As a programmer, I'd be interested to know more about how I can help. >>>> I'm not really used to open-source projects, but I'm going to have to >>>> implement this solution for my company. Which is why I want to find other >>>> Canadian (preferably Quebec) users, and lend a hand if possible. What would >>>> I need to know to participate? >>>> >>>> Olivier >>>> >>>> Le 2009-11-12 à 06:20, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >>>> >>>> Christopher, >>>>> >>>>> Sorry this is maybe a bit a technical answer, but I believe it shows >>>>> another mindset >>>>> >>>>> One of the causes, which is maybe hidden for philosophical and >>>>> pragmatical reasons, is that we (should) always use RTC mode (Review- >>>>> Then-Commit) >>>>> For more on this apect you could be interested by >>>>> http://old.nabble.com/Review-Then-Commit-td26303921.html >>>>> >>>>> To commiters : this does not mean that I'm pushing for CTR mode, only >>>>> that it's interesting to see how other communities are doing >>>>> and reactions about that ;o) >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]> >>>>> >>>>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> So it's the chicken-and-egg situtation? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> No : it's improving and the curve is not exponential nor even >>>>>> quadratic but is more than flat. Actually this is very clear since >>>>>> we released 9.04 >>>>>> And maybe the new effort which may happend on SME will increase even >>>>>> more this curve http://markmail.org/thread/whm4uqjhcvwz6pvp >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> There are not enough contributors to focus on making stable releases >>>>>>> and documentation. But without stable releases and >>>>>>> documentation, new contributors are not attracted to ofbiz. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Yes we need more solid teams, this is improving... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: "Christopher Snow" <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Are you saying that there are now enough contributors to implement >>>>>>>>> a good release plan? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Many thanks, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Chris >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Nov 12, 2009, at 7:34 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ofbiz community seems to be focused on making ofbiz generate as >>>>>>>>>>> much consulting revenue as possible and not on making ofbiz a >>>>>>>>>>> great shrink wrapped product. For example, end users having to >>>>>>>>>>> use svn and patches so to keep their systems up to date is >>>>>>>>>>> crazy. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I don't think that the focus of the OFBiz community is to make >>>>>>>>>> OFBiz a consulting revenue generator, nor I think that the >>>>>>>>>> absence of a stable recent release is a consequence of this. >>>>>>>>>> The awful truth, imo, is that maintaining a release is expensive >>>>>>>>>> (in terms of man hours) and the time contributed by the users >>>>>>>>>> of OFBiz (i.e. its community made of final users, consultants >>>>>>>>>> etc...) until now has not been enough to have a good release >>>>>>>>>> plan. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jacopo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > > Best > > Carsten Schinzer > > Waisenhausstr. 53a > 80637 München > Germany |
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by c.schinzer
Hi Carsten,
Theses are very good questions but difficult to answer. For me it's more a felling than numbers. For the moment I only use this metric http://tinyurl.com/yb3h4hv. So you see it's more in survival mode. Also I presume that it would be difficult to organize things (and even more people) as you suggested because we all depend on clients requests and that changes pretty much all the time. But yes we may think about it... IMO, the backlog concept could be the one we could focus on 1st. There has been some attempts but not directed to a release http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/New+Features+Roadmap+-+Living+Document Jacques From: "Carsten Schinzer" <[hidden email]> However, the argument of "critical mass" being brought up above seems a little vague to me: What is actually the number of comitters / contributors required to switch into a good release plan? Any ideas? Is it dependant on the BUG statistics reported on JIRA? How many are they and how good are we contributors in fixing them? Are we currently building a backlog? Is it for trunk or for releases only? How are bug reports/bugs distributed across components? Is it possibly critical to have a certain number of committers per component? Kind regards Carsten |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ruth Hoffman-2
I feel it is worth looking at the other way too.
If ofbiz were to move towards reusing projects like hibernate and spring and generalize some of the cool concepts into reusable libraries packaged through something like Apache Commons or ofbiz subprojects it would drive adoption. By resuable i mean things like XML form based langugage, renderers. minilang. These nice ideas do not need to be ofbiz only. I realize this is difficult and not immediate focus of ofiz.. I am also sure this may not always be best design or priority fit. .. but it does cause practical problems - developers pay by not learning other things that are potentially more mature in design and popularity, this in turn can lead to lower financial returns as outlined by Christopher. For employers, if a developer votes with their feet a lot of training investment is lost. Books really help. Cost of understanding and maintaining ofbiz based projects and having developers feel it is the right thing to learn is very important i feel. Harmeet ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth Hoffman" <[hidden email]> The more new adopters we get, the more likely OFBiz will be brought into the enterprise and become mainstream. And then the secret will be out and everyone will be salivating all over it - just like the do with Spring and Hibernate. Christopher Snow wrote: > I spend a lot of time learning. I am learning new systems all the > time and to date I have implemented a multitude of opensource > solutions . I enjoy learning, I enjoy new technologies. ... > When looking at returns, as a contractor, I usually notice what skills > the UK job boards are asking for. I have seen a few jobs recently > asking for adempiere and compiere skills. I have not seen many jobs > requiring ofbiz skills, but I do have a number of small companies that > want bespoke enterprise application development that suits the ofbiz > framework. |
|
|
It would be a good idea a full integration of Maven2 on Ofbiz? it is already
considered/done? I think it may be helpful to control the release mechanism and also gives the ability to separate everything in modules as Harmet said. For example, Ofbiz core would be the main module and all the compoments will depend of it so in order to activate/deactivate components it will be very easy, just changing the main POM should be enough. I've only seen one person who is using his own repository of release 9.04, but probably it is a good idea to have ofbiz on a public repository. Sorry if it doesn't make sense, it's just an idea from an ofbiz noob. On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Harmeet Bedi <[hidden email]>wrote: > I feel it is worth looking at the other way too. > > If ofbiz were to move towards reusing projects like hibernate and spring > and generalize some of the cool concepts into reusable libraries packaged > through something like Apache Commons or ofbiz subprojects it would drive > adoption. By resuable i mean things like XML form based langugage, > renderers. minilang. These nice ideas do not need to be ofbiz only. > > I realize this is difficult and not immediate focus of ofiz.. I am also > sure this may not always be best design or priority fit. > .. but it does cause practical problems - developers pay by not learning > other things that are potentially more mature in design and popularity, this > in turn can lead to lower financial returns as outlined by Christopher. For > employers, if a developer votes with their feet a lot of training investment > is lost. Books really help. Cost of understanding and maintaining ofbiz > based projects and having developers feel it is the right thing to learn is > very important i feel. > > Harmeet > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ruth Hoffman" <[hidden email]> > > The more new adopters we get, the more likely > OFBiz will be brought into the enterprise and become mainstream. And > then the secret will be out and everyone will be salivating all over it > - just like the do with Spring and Hibernate. > > Christopher Snow wrote: > > I spend a lot of time learning. I am learning new systems all the > > time and to date I have implemented a multitude of opensource > > solutions . I enjoy learning, I enjoy new technologies. > ... > > When looking at returns, as a contractor, I usually notice what skills > > the UK job boards are asking for. I have seen a few jobs recently > > asking for adempiere and compiere skills. I have not seen many jobs > > requiring ofbiz skills, but I do have a number of small companies that > > want bespoke enterprise application development that suits the ofbiz > > framework. > -- Jonatan Soto Aguilera C/ Comte Borrell, 328 3º4ª 08029 Barcelona Telf: +34935350010 Móvil: +34669908135 www.japanflavour.com |
|
|
Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that
any efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract newcomers to the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a development framework to a few architects and senior developers that I have worked with. When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first reaction is to reject ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce application. I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz that DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the main stumbling block to separating the core development framework. There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for complex types that will give the development framework even more power. jonatan soto wrote: > It would be a good idea a full integration of Maven2 on Ofbiz? it is already > considered/done? I think it may be helpful to control the release mechanism > and also gives the ability to separate everything in modules as Harmet > said. > For example, Ofbiz core would be the main module and all the compoments will > depend of it so in order to activate/deactivate components it will be very > easy, just changing the main POM should be enough. > I've only seen one person who is using his own repository of release 9.04, > but probably it is a good idea to have ofbiz on a public repository. > > Sorry if it doesn't make sense, it's just an idea from an ofbiz noob. > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Harmeet Bedi <[hidden email]>wrote: > > |
|
|
I am agree with you Chris, the OFBiz is an excellent framework; OFBiz is like "The Beauty and The Beast". The Beast for the newcomers, but if we understand the framework, you will find "The Beauty of the OFBiz". - Charles TJ -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Snow [mailto:[hidden email]] Sent: 13 Nopember 2009 15:18 To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: OFBiz in Canada? Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that any efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract newcomers to the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a development framework to a few architects and senior developers that I have worked with. When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first reaction is to reject ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce application. I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz that DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the main stumbling block to separating the core development framework. There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for complex types that will give the development framework even more power. |
|
|
If a company start using ofbiz for small applications using just the
development framework, they can be very productive within a few weeks. However, if they have to take on board the whole of ofbiz (i.e. the components) before they get started, that is a huge task that may put them off using ofbiz. If ofbiz followed the modular approach using maven, companies could start using ofbiz core (+ probably party management), and then use more and more of the other components as they get more experienced. Charles TJ - SELC Sales Div wrote: > I am agree with you Chris, the OFBiz is an excellent framework; > OFBiz is like "The Beauty and The Beast". > The Beast for the newcomers, but if we understand the framework, > you will find "The Beauty of the OFBiz". > > - Charles TJ > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Snow [mailto:[hidden email]] > Sent: 13 Nopember 2009 15:18 > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: OFBiz in Canada? > > > Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that > any efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract > newcomers to the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a > development framework to a few architects and senior developers that I > have worked with. When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first > reaction is to reject ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce > application. > > I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core > development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. > > It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz > that DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the > main stumbling block to separating the core development framework. > > There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans > Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for > complex types that will give the development framework even more power. > > |
|
|
On Nov 13, 2009, at 10:42 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: > If a company start using ofbiz for small applications using just the development framework, they can be very productive within a few weeks. > However, if they have to take on board the whole of ofbiz (i.e. the components) before they get started, that is a huge task that may put them off using ofbiz. > > If ofbiz followed the modular approach using maven, companies could start using ofbiz core (+ probably party management), and then use more and more of the other components as they get more experienced. They can already follow this approach and just ignore most of the components even if they are there. Jacopo > Charles TJ - SELC Sales Div wrote: >> I am agree with you Chris, the OFBiz is an excellent framework; >> OFBiz is like "The Beauty and The Beast". >> The Beast for the newcomers, but if we understand the framework, >> you will find "The Beauty of the OFBiz". >> >> - Charles TJ >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christopher Snow [mailto:[hidden email]] >> Sent: 13 Nopember 2009 15:18 >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: OFBiz in Canada? >> >> >> Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that any efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract newcomers to the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a development framework to a few architects and senior developers that I have worked with. When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first reaction is to reject ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce application. >> >> I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. >> >> It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz that DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the main stumbling block to separating the core development framework. >> >> There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for complex types that will give the development framework even more power. >> >> > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Chris Snow-3
Chris, I guess you mean to simplify the things, but then Ofbiz doesn't force
to use all components, user can use only the required components and can ignore the rest. As you said, probably party management, maybe someone else wants to only order management or only ecommerce, so if all the components are there, user can decide which one to use. -Abdullah On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Christopher Snow < [hidden email]> wrote: > If a company start using ofbiz for small applications using just the > development framework, they can be very productive within a few weeks. > However, if they have to take on board the whole of ofbiz (i.e. the > components) before they get started, that is a huge task that may put them > off using ofbiz. > > If ofbiz followed the modular approach using maven, companies could start > using ofbiz core (+ probably party management), and then use more and more > of the other components as they get more experienced. > Charles TJ - SELC Sales Div wrote: > >> I am agree with you Chris, the OFBiz is an excellent framework; >> OFBiz is like "The Beauty and The Beast". >> The Beast for the newcomers, but if we understand the framework, >> you will find "The Beauty of the OFBiz". >> >> - Charles TJ >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Christopher Snow [mailto:[hidden email]] >> Sent: 13 Nopember 2009 15:18 >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: OFBiz in Canada? >> >> >> Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that any >> efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract newcomers to >> the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a development >> framework to a few architects and senior developers that I have worked with. >> When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first reaction is to reject >> ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce application. >> >> I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core >> development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. >> >> It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz that >> DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the main >> stumbling block to separating the core development framework. >> >> There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans >> Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for >> complex types that will give the development framework even more power. >> >> >> > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Jacopo Cappellato-4
Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > On Nov 13, 2009, at 10:42 AM, Christopher Snow wrote: > > >> If a company start using ofbiz for small applications using just the development framework, they can be very productive within a few weeks. >> However, if they have to take on board the whole of ofbiz (i.e. the components) before they get started, that is a huge task that may put them off using ofbiz. >> >> If ofbiz followed the modular approach using maven, companies could start using ofbiz core (+ probably party management), and then use more and more of the other components as they get more experienced. >> > > They can already follow this approach and just ignore most of the components even if they are there. > > Jacopo > > That is the approach I followed for my last client. But I also had to go to extra effort to put an apache proxy in front of tomcat to prevent access to the unwanted components. Also, having to unmount all the unwanted components and creating a patch for this is starting to deviate the framework user from what they want to do - develop applications, not hacking code out from ofbiz. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Abdullah Shaikh-3
When I tried to remove the unwanted components, I can into dependency
problems. A modular approach to using the components such as maven would stop the developer having to manually work out dependencies to remove components. Leaving the unwanted components in place even though they don't get used makes DBA's and support people twitchy, asking questions like "why are all those tables created even though they aren't used?" Abdullah Shaikh wrote: > Chris, I guess you mean to simplify the things, but then Ofbiz doesn't force > to use all components, user can use only the required components and can > ignore the rest. > > As you said, probably party management, maybe someone else wants to only > order management or only ecommerce, so if all the components are there, user > can decide which one to use. > > -Abdullah > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Christopher Snow < > [hidden email]> wrote: > > >> If a company start using ofbiz for small applications using just the >> development framework, they can be very productive within a few weeks. >> However, if they have to take on board the whole of ofbiz (i.e. the >> components) before they get started, that is a huge task that may put them >> off using ofbiz. >> >> If ofbiz followed the modular approach using maven, companies could start >> using ofbiz core (+ probably party management), and then use more and more >> of the other components as they get more experienced. >> Charles TJ - SELC Sales Div wrote: >> >> >>> I am agree with you Chris, the OFBiz is an excellent framework; >>> OFBiz is like "The Beauty and The Beast". >>> The Beast for the newcomers, but if we understand the framework, >>> you will find "The Beauty of the OFBiz". >>> >>> - Charles TJ >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Christopher Snow [mailto:[hidden email]] >>> Sent: 13 Nopember 2009 15:18 >>> To: [hidden email] >>> Subject: Re: OFBiz in Canada? >>> >>> >>> Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that any >>> efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract newcomers to >>> the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a development >>> framework to a few architects and senior developers that I have worked with. >>> When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first reaction is to reject >>> ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce application. >>> >>> I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core >>> development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. >>> >>> It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz that >>> DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the main >>> stumbling block to separating the core development framework. >>> >>> There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans >>> Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for >>> complex types that will give the development framework even more power. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > |
|
|
I am not sure, I haven't tried this, but could commenting the not required
components from component-load.xml file have helped ? On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Christopher Snow < [hidden email]> wrote: > When I tried to remove the unwanted components, I can into dependency > problems. A modular approach to using the components such as maven would > stop the developer having to manually work out dependencies to remove > components. > > Leaving the unwanted components in place even though they don't get used > makes DBA's and support people twitchy, asking questions like "why are all > those tables created even though they aren't used?" > > > Abdullah Shaikh wrote: > >> Chris, I guess you mean to simplify the things, but then Ofbiz doesn't >> force >> to use all components, user can use only the required components and can >> ignore the rest. >> >> As you said, probably party management, maybe someone else wants to only >> order management or only ecommerce, so if all the components are there, >> user >> can decide which one to use. >> >> -Abdullah >> >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:12 PM, Christopher Snow < >> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> If a company start using ofbiz for small applications using just the >>> development framework, they can be very productive within a few weeks. >>> However, if they have to take on board the whole of ofbiz (i.e. the >>> components) before they get started, that is a huge task that may put >>> them >>> off using ofbiz. >>> >>> If ofbiz followed the modular approach using maven, companies could start >>> using ofbiz core (+ probably party management), and then use more and >>> more >>> of the other components as they get more experienced. >>> Charles TJ - SELC Sales Div wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> I am agree with you Chris, the OFBiz is an excellent framework; >>>> OFBiz is like "The Beauty and The Beast". >>>> The Beast for the newcomers, but if we understand the framework, >>>> you will find "The Beauty of the OFBiz". >>>> >>>> - Charles TJ >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Christopher Snow [mailto:[hidden email]] >>>> Sent: 13 Nopember 2009 15:18 >>>> To: [hidden email] >>>> Subject: Re: OFBiz in Canada? >>>> >>>> >>>> Ofbiz is an excellent application development framework. I think that >>>> any >>>> efforts that would focus on selling this aspect would attract newcomers >>>> to >>>> the project. In the past, I have recommended ofbiz as a development >>>> framework to a few architects and senior developers that I have worked >>>> with. >>>> When they take a look at the ofbiz site, their first reaction is to >>>> reject >>>> ofbiz as they think it is just another ecommerce application. >>>> >>>> I know a few of the users on the mailing list would like to see the core >>>> development framework of ofbiz separated from the other components. >>>> >>>> It would be interesting to know how many of the committers for ofbiz >>>> that >>>> DON'T use ofbiz primarily for ecommerce. I think that would be the main >>>> stumbling block to separating the core development framework. >>>> >>>> There are some interesting areas being worked on that such as Hans >>>> Bakker's BIRT implementation and /Jacques Le/ Roux Axis integration for >>>> complex types that will give the development framework even more power. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > |
|
|
That's the approach I tried when I ran into dependency problems. This
then worried me that if I did fix the dependency problem I found, what other dependency issues would I run into later down the line? A developer learning ofbiz doesn't need to think about component dependencies on top of learning the framework! I was thinking about your comment of leaving the components in place even though they are not used. Does leaving unused components in place have a performance impact on ofbiz? Do those components consume memory? - they are certainly using disk space. Some of the components for example BIRT consume a fair amount of space. Can you imagine if Eclipse worked by making you install every plugin available even if you don't use it? The performance impact on eclipse wouldn't be too bad though because eclipse lazily loads plugins when they are first used. Abdullah Shaikh wrote: > I am not sure, I haven't tried this, but could commenting the not required > components from component-load.xml file have helped ? > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 3:40 PM, Christopher Snow < > [hidden email]> wrote: > > >> When I tried to remove the unwanted components, I can into dependency >> problems. A modular approach to using the components such as maven would >> stop the developer having to manually work out dependencies to remove >> components. >> >> Leaving the unwanted components in place even though they don't get used >> makes DBA's and support people twitchy, asking questions like "why are all >> those tables created even though they aren't used?" >> >> >> |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |