OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
Locked
1234567
1234567
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
 
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
In reply to this post by Leon Torres-2
Is there something wrong with the current OFBiz wiki linked to below? http://docs.ofbiz.org/pages/listpages-dirview.action?key=OFBIZ -David On Jan 18, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Leon Torres wrote: > I also believe it would be worthwhile to experiment with an open > ofbiz wiki. As the ofbiz community continues to grow, we will > certainly attain the critical mass necessary to make such a thing > work. > > For instance, we've authored a bunch of cookbooks in .txt format > about specific tricks and how-to's in OFBIZ: > > http://www.opensourcestrategies.com/ofbiz/tutorials.php > > Unfortunately contributing to those is hard because it takes an > investment in time to read, verify, and update the documents on our > end. If they were in the form of an open wiki, it would be far > easier to expand on them. > > - Leon > > > Florin Jurcovici wrote: >> IMO, an open wiki is the right thing to do. Even if I had some >> experience which I'd like to share, if the wiki is closed or >> restricted, I cannot. Some maintainers should review docs >> occasionally and correct or delete them if they are not OK, maybe >> draw an outline of the documentation at the beginning then let >> whoever is willing to fill the pages. But IMO a closed/restricted >> wiki is not the way to go. >> --Florin Jurcovici >> ------------------ >> Why do psychics have to ask you for your name? |
smime.p7s (3K)
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
On Jan 20, 2007, at 1:25 AM, Ian McNulty wrote: > David, > > I can see where you're coming from on this. This project is better > documented than anything else I've seen in the field.You yourself > have produced a truly awesome amount of documentation. I don't know > where you find the time. All are extremely well written, very > clear, very well laid out. A model of their kind. (No I'm not > sucking up - I mean it :) So what could possibly be the problem. > > I found the Introduction Videos and Diagrams page you link to here > a couple of days ago myself. > > It was whilst working through these videos that the light bulb went > off. > > What you're talking us through is a diagram of the wiring harness > of a jumbo jet. > > Essential for the engineers who need to service it. > > Absolutely the last kind of map a pilot wants to find on his lap. > > Know what I mean? applications. The two are very different, change very differently, need to be understood by different people in different ways, etc. My current estimate is that to produce something adequate for a "pilot", given that there are about 100 different "pilot" roles in OFBiz, would require many times the effort to produce that the framework videos with their diagrams, reference materials, transcriptions, etc. Right now I don't have the $500k to get into that... and the $40k already spent on the documents which are now PDF-dumped into the docs.ofbiz.org site was clearly inadequate, especially as it is mostly reference materials (which is why you won't find how-to stuff in the reference guides, they are references after all, just for reference purposes). The Application Overview for Users is probably more of what you're looking for, though that section only represents maybe 3-5% of what is in OFBiz right now. Of course, that's assuming such documents could even be written in a way that is close to generally useful. How do I use it? Well, that depends on what you want to do... and unfortunately across a few different industries that list grows into hundreds of thousands of activities... So, that's the big question with any document: who is the target audience? The more specific the answer, the better the document will address their needs. But who is the target audience for OFBiz? ... ? -David |
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
Administrator
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
Administrator
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
Administrator
|
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
In reply to this post by Ian McNulty
Nope. The users list is for users of OFBiz. The dev list is for developers of OFBiz. There is commonly confusion around this point. On the users list we don't care if the users is a developer customizing OFBiz or an end user who is only seeing OFBiz from a web browser. If you're trying to say that the community isn't geared up to support end users who just touch OFBiz through a browser and are people fulfilling orders and managing warehouses, then you're are 100% correct. This community is not even close to geared up for something like that. Not even close. We also don't have major aspirations to doing that because there would be a significant resource gap. If you have some way of staffing such a thing that has eluded the rest of us, please let us know!!! -David On Jan 20, 2007, at 2:03 AM, Ian McNulty wrote: > Nothing at all wrong with the link. > > It's what it's linking too that's the problem. > > The topics... the layout... everything speaks to me of engineering > plans, not flight plans. > > To start building a flight plan you need a blank page, not one that > is already half full with wiring diagrams. > > Even Anil thought he was talking to the Dev not the Users list !!! > > Imo there is no users list. If a pilot came across ofbiz.apache.org > he would know at first glance he was in the wrong place. > > The difference is between www.ubuntu.com/ and www.debian.org/ The > first welcomes the uninitiated and draws them in. The second looks > like a wonderful resource for engineers. We're not talking about > all the manuals and small print inside the box. Where talking about > what it says at first glance on the tin. > > I think I can see where the confusion arises. > > You can focus on one or the other, but you can't focus on both on > the same page. (Yes, I know this contradicts my earlier post. But > it's a question of focus. On the user pages the wiring needs to be > there, but buried behind the dashboard. On the engineering pages > the reverse it true.) > > On Si's recommendation I've started reading Bruce Eckel's 'Thinking > In Java.' In Chapter 1 under 'The hidden implementation' he draws > a distinction between 'Class Creators' and 'Client Programmers.' > > Client Programmers are users of the objects produced by Class > Creators - much of which they are deliberately locked out from to > prevent them monkeying around with things they do not fully > understand. > > To me, the Dev list is for class creators. The Users list for > Client Programmers. > > There is no users list. > > Ian > > > > > > David E. Jones wrote: >> >> Is there something wrong with the current OFBiz wiki linked to below? >> >> http://docs.ofbiz.org/pages/listpages-dirview.action?key=OFBIZ >> >> -David >> >> >> On Jan 18, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Leon Torres wrote: >> >>> I also believe it would be worthwhile to experiment with an open >>> ofbiz wiki. As the ofbiz community continues to grow, we will >>> certainly attain the critical mass necessary to make such a thing >>> work. >>> >>> For instance, we've authored a bunch of cookbooks in .txt format >>> about specific tricks and how-to's in OFBIZ: >>> >>> http://www.opensourcestrategies.com/ofbiz/tutorials.php >>> >>> Unfortunately contributing to those is hard because it takes an >>> investment in time to read, verify, and update the documents on >>> our end. If they were in the form of an open wiki, it would be >>> far easier to expand on them. >>> >>> - Leon >>> >>> >>> Florin Jurcovici wrote: >>>> IMO, an open wiki is the right thing to do. Even if I had some >>>> experience which I'd like to share, if the wiki is closed or >>>> restricted, I cannot. Some maintainers should review docs >>>> occasionally and correct or delete them if they are not OK, >>>> maybe draw an outline of the documentation at the beginning then >>>> let whoever is willing to fill the pages. But IMO a closed/ >>>> restricted wiki is not the way to go. >>>> --Florin Jurcovici >>>> ------------------ >>>> Why do psychics have to ask you for your name? >> > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------ > mcnultyMEDIA > 60 Birkdale Gardens > Durham > DH1 2UL > > t: +44 (0)191 384 4736 > e: [hidden email] > w: www.mcnultymedia.co.uk > ====================================================================== > ======================== > This communication is for the exclusive use of the intended > recipient(s) named above and is confidential. Any form of > distribution, copying, discussion or use of this communication, its > contents, or any information contained herein without prior consent > is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in error, > please notify the sender by email or by telephone on +44 (0)191 384 > 4736 > > This email has been checked for viruses, however, we cannot accept > any liability sustained as a result of software viruses and would > recommend that you carry out your own virus checks before opening > any attachment. > ====================================================================== > ======================== |
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
In reply to this post by Ian McNulty
Sound great to me Ian. I guess what I'm wondering is if you're really interested in this, what is YOUR plan to make it so? I guess in other words, it sounds like you don't like my landing strip. So what would your landing strip look like, and what are your plans for creating it? -David On Jan 20, 2007, at 2:33 AM, Ian McNulty wrote: > Yeah. OK Chris. Very funny, but... > > OFBiz is already half way down that 13 year road. > > And who's to say that Mark Shuttleworth isn't monitoring this group > on his laptop 35,000 feet over the Pacific and wondering if it > might be worth dropping in. > > But if you don't think it's worth bothering to clear a landing > strip, then that could never happen. ;) > > Ian > > > > Chris Howe wrote: >> It only took Debian 13 years to create a users list >> and the keen interest of a billionaire philanthropist. >> >> I think we could get a _real users list with either >> half of that equation. Who's with me? ;-) >> --- Ian McNulty <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >>> Nothing at all wrong with the link. >>> >>> It's what it's linking too that's the problem. >>> >>> The topics... the layout... everything speaks to me >>> of engineering plans, not flight plans. >>> >>> To start building a flight plan you need a blank >>> page, not one that is already half full with wiring diagrams. >>> >>> Even Anil thought he was talking to the Dev not the >>> Users list !!! >>> >>> Imo there is no users list. If a pilot came across >>> ofbiz.apache.org he would know at first glance he was in the wrong >>> place. >>> >>> The difference is between www.ubuntu.com/ and >>> www.debian.org/ The first welcomes the uninitiated and draws them >>> in. The >>> second looks like a wonderful resource for engineers. We're not >>> talking >>> about all the manuals and small print inside the box. Where >>> talking about what it says at first glance on the tin. >>> >>> I think I can see where the confusion arises. >>> >>> You can focus on one or the other, but you can't >>> focus on both on the same page. (Yes, I know this contradicts my >>> earlier >>> post. But it's a question of focus. On the user pages the wiring >>> needs to be there, but buried behind the dashboard. On the >>> engineering >>> pages the reverse it true.) >>> >>> On Si's recommendation I've started reading Bruce >>> Eckel's 'Thinking In Java.' In Chapter 1 under 'The hidden >>> implementation' he draws a distinction between 'Class Creators' >>> and 'Client >>> Programmers.' >>> >>> Client Programmers are users of the objects produced >>> by Class Creators - much of which they are deliberately locked >>> out from >>> to prevent them monkeying around with things they do not fully >>> understand. >>> >>> To me, the Dev list is for class creators. The Users >>> list for Client Programmers. >>> >>> There is no users list. >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> David E. Jones wrote: >>> >>>> Is there something wrong with the current OFBiz >>>> >>> wiki linked to below? >>> >>>> >> http://docs.ofbiz.org/pages/listpages-dirview.action?key=OFBIZ >> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jan 18, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Leon Torres wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I also believe it would be worthwhile to >>>>> >>> experiment with an open >>>>> ofbiz wiki. As the ofbiz community continues to >>>>> >>> grow, we will >>>>> certainly attain the critical mass necessary to >>>>> >>> make such a thing work. >>> >>>>> For instance, we've authored a bunch of cookbooks >>>>> >>> in .txt format >>>>> about specific tricks and how-to's in OFBIZ: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> http://www.opensourcestrategies.com/ofbiz/tutorials.php >> >>>>> Unfortunately contributing to those is hard >>>>> >>> because it takes an >>>>> investment in time to read, verify, and update >>>>> >>> the documents on our >>>>> end. If they were in the form of an open wiki, >>>>> >>> it would be far >>>>> easier to expand on them. >>>>> >>>>> - Leon >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Florin Jurcovici wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> IMO, an open wiki is the right thing to do. Even >>>>>> >>> if I had some >>>>>> experience which I'd like to share, if the wiki >>>>>> >>> is closed or >>>>>> restricted, I cannot. Some maintainers should >>>>>> >>> review docs >>>>>> occasionally and correct or delete them if they >>>>>> >>> are not OK, maybe >>>>>> draw an outline of the documentation at the >>>>>> >>> beginning then let >>>>>> whoever is willing to fill the pages. But IMO a >>>>>> >>> closed/restricted >>>>>> wiki is not the way to go. >>>>>> --Florin Jurcovici >>>>>> ------------------ >>>>>> Why do psychics have to ask you for your name? >>>>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ------------------------- >> >>> mcnultyMEDIA >>> 60 Birkdale Gardens >>> Durham >>> DH1 2UL >>> >>> t: +44 (0)191 384 4736 >>> e: [hidden email] >>> w: www.mcnultymedia.co.uk >>> >>> >> ===================================================================== >> ========================= >> >>> This communication is for the exclusive use of the >>> intended recipient(s) named above and is >>> confidential. Any form of distribution, copying, >>> discussion or use of this communication, its >>> contents, or any information contained herein >>> without prior consent is strictly prohibited. If you >>> receive this communication in error, please notify >>> the sender by email or by telephone on +44 (0)191 >>> 384 4736 >>> >>> This email has been checked for viruses, however, we >>> cannot accept any liability sustained as a result of >>> software viruses and would recommend that you carry >>> out your own virus checks before opening any >>> attachment. >>> >>> >> ===================================================================== >> ========================= >> >> >> >> > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------ > mcnultyMEDIA > 60 Birkdale Gardens > Durham > DH1 2UL > > t: +44 (0)191 384 4736 > e: [hidden email] > w: www.mcnultymedia.co.uk > ====================================================================== > ======================== > This communication is for the exclusive use of the intended > recipient(s) named above and is confidential. Any form of > distribution, copying, discussion or use of this communication, its > contents, or any information contained herein without prior consent > is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in error, > please notify the sender by email or by telephone on +44 (0)191 384 > 4736 > > This email has been checked for viruses, however, we cannot accept > any liability sustained as a result of software viruses and would > recommend that you carry out your own virus checks before opening > any attachment. > ====================================================================== > ======================== |
Re: OFBiz/opentaps as a small business accounting package?
|
|
In reply to this post by Ian McNulty
Maybe all of this discussion is being difficult because of one simple thing: Apache OFBiz is NOT like oscommerce, ubuntu, etc. It is NOT meant to be a use as-is, out of the box, piece of software. It is meant to be, is designed as, and is implemented as a foundation and starting point for custom enterprise solutions, be they for one company or one thousand companies. Why would we want to be an OOTB project? There are lots of those for ecommerce and small business systems and I see no reason to compete there. It is a market well served. We're going after the tough market with medium sized businesses that need custom stuff to grow. The OOTB solutions are way too limiting, making it impossible to scale operations. The traditional enterprise systems can be customized to do exactly what they need, but cost more than their entire yearly revenue. Looking around the OFBiz documents and such I don't think this distinction is adequately represented, so I added some text similar to the above to the home page of ofbiz.apache.org. It should be public within a few hours, ie whenever the next deployment job runs. -David On Jan 20, 2007, at 3:49 AM, Ian McNulty wrote: > Chris, David, Everybody. > > One last thought on the subject before I have my porridge and > another lie down ;) > > I'm wondering if any of you guys have ever taken a good hard look > at the osCommerce, Zen Cart or Ubuntu forums? > > http://www.zen-cart.com/forum > > http://forums.oscommerce.com > > http://www.ubuntuforums.org/ > > Yes. I know php is nasty. But that's not the point. > > Look at the accessibility and structure of the interface. > > All user levels are accommodated. > > All find their natural place. > > Nearly a quarter of a million members on Ubuntu. 120K on > osCommerce. 2,347 and 824 currently active respectively at this > very moment as we speak > > A working model of how to build a user base surely, if nothing else? > > Ian > > > > > Chris Howe wrote: >> Ian, >> >> While I certainly enjoy the analogies, who are you >> ultimately suggesting create these lowest common >> denominator (LCD) documents? >> As has already been mentioned, once you pass that >> "aha" moment in OFBiz, it's difficult to understand >> why the engineering documentation didn't make sense >> the first time around. 3D vector calculus, as you put >> it, seems so elementary obvious at that point that >> it's difficult to convey it in simpler terms; even >> though you remember it not being obvious when you >> started. I don't think it's very time/quality >> productive for someone who's passed that "aha" moment >> to produce this documentation; at least not without >> the aid of an "uninitiated". >> If you'd like to be that test subject, I'm sure there >> are a mess of people, including myself, that would be >> willing to help explain things to you as you make your >> way through the concepts, documenting as you go. But >> the POV of the documentation cannot be from someone >> who's already gotten the bird off the ground, because >> they're not really sure which button they pressed to >> make it all seem second nature. >> >> >> --- Ian McNulty <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >>> David, >>> >>> I don't get the proposition that there are 100 >>> different pilot roles. >>> >>> There are many 1,000s of different destinations. >>> Maybe more than a dozen different pilot roles (commercial, fighter, >>> bomber, spotter, etc.). But but there IS a lowest common >>> denominator. >>> They all fly planes. They all start off on fixed wing, single >>> engine props. They all need to understand basic navigation, >>> aerodynamics, >>> flight-engineering etc. >>> >>> But it is very basic. The need to understand lift, >>> drag, how to calculate take off velocities etc. But I doubt if >>> they start of with 3D vector calculus or need to know what a >>> Reynold's >>> number is. >>> >>> So why can't the target be whatever denominators are >>> common to all pilots? >>> >>> How to find the door handle and the start button >>> would be top of my list. If they can't find those then they ain't >>> never >>> gonna fly. >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> David E. Jones wrote: >>> >>>> On Jan 20, 2007, at 1:25 AM, Ian McNulty wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> David, >>>>> >>>>> I can see where you're coming from on this. This >>>>> >>> project is better >>>>> documented than anything else I've seen in the >>>>> >>> field.You yourself >>>>> have produced a truly awesome amount of >>>>> >>> documentation. I don't know >>>>> where you find the time. All are extremely well >>>>> >>> written, very clear, >>>>> very well laid out. A model of their kind. (No >>>>> >>> I'm not sucking up - I >>>>> mean it :) So what could possibly be the problem. >>>>> >>>>> I found the Introduction Videos and Diagrams page >>>>> >>> you link to here a >>>>> couple of days ago myself. >>>>> >>>>> It was whilst working through these videos that >>>>> >>> the light bulb went off. >>> >>>>> What you're talking us through is a diagram of >>>>> >>> the wiring harness of >>>>> a jumbo jet. >>>>> >>>>> Essential for the engineers who need to service >>>>> >>> it. >>> >>>>> Absolutely the last kind of map a pilot wants to >>>>> >>> find on his lap. >>> >>>>> Know what I mean? >>>>> >>>> Uh, yeah, that's because it is meant to cover the >>>> >>> framework, not the >>>> applications. The two are very different, change >>>> >>> very differently, >>>> need to be understood by different people in >>>> >>> different ways, etc. My >>>> current estimate is that to produce something >>>> >>> adequate for a "pilot", >>>> given that there are about 100 different "pilot" >>>> >>> roles in OFBiz, would >>>> require many times the effort to produce that the >>>> >>> framework videos >>>> with their diagrams, reference materials, >>>> >>> transcriptions, etc. Right >>>> now I don't have the $500k to get into that... and >>>> >>> the $40k already >>>> spent on the documents which are now PDF-dumped >>>> >>> into the >>>> docs.ofbiz.org site was clearly inadequate, >>>> >>> especially as it is mostly >>>> reference materials (which is why you won't find >>>> >>> how-to stuff in the >>>> reference guides, they are references after all, >>>> >>> just for reference >>>> purposes). The Application Overview for Users is >>>> >>> probably more of what >>>> you're looking for, though that section only >>>> >>> represents maybe 3-5% of >>>> what is in OFBiz right now. >>>> >>>> Of course, that's assuming such documents could >>>> >>> even be written in a >>>> way that is close to generally useful. How do I >>>> >>> use it? Well, that >>>> depends on what you want to do... and >>>> >>> unfortunately across a few >>>> different industries that list grows into hundreds >>>> >>> of thousands of >>>> activities... >>>> >>>> So, that's the big question with any document: who >>>> >>> is the target >>>> audience? The more specific the answer, the better >>>> >>> the document will >>>> address their needs. But who is the target >>>> >>> audience for OFBiz? ... ? >>> >>>> -David >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ------------------------- >> >>> mcnultyMEDIA >>> 60 Birkdale Gardens >>> Durham >>> DH1 2UL >>> >>> t: +44 (0)191 384 4736 >>> e: [hidden email] >>> w: www.mcnultymedia.co.uk >>> >>> >> ===================================================================== >> ========================= >> >>> This communication is for the exclusive use of the >>> intended recipient(s) named above and is >>> confidential. Any form of distribution, copying, >>> discussion or use of this communication, its >>> contents, or any information contained herein >>> without prior consent is strictly prohibited. If you >>> receive this communication in error, please notify >>> the sender by email or by telephone on +44 (0)191 >>> 384 4736 >>> >>> This email has been checked for viruses, however, we >>> cannot accept any liability sustained as a result of >>> software viruses and would recommend that you carry >>> out your own virus checks before opening any >>> attachment. >>> >>> >> ===================================================================== >> ========================= >> >> >> >> > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------ > mcnultyMEDIA > 60 Birkdale Gardens > Durham > DH1 2UL > > t: +44 (0)191 384 4736 > e: [hidden email] > w: www.mcnultymedia.co.uk > ====================================================================== > ======================== > This communication is for the exclusive use of the intended > recipient(s) named above and is confidential. Any form of > distribution, copying, discussion or use of this communication, its > contents, or any information contained herein without prior consent > is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in error, > please notify the sender by email or by telephone on +44 (0)191 384 > 4736 > > This email has been checked for viruses, however, we cannot accept > any liability sustained as a result of software viruses and would > recommend that you carry out your own virus checks before opening > any attachment. > ====================================================================== > ======================== |
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |