OfBiz workflow
Locked
12
12
 
|
Hi,
I'm trying to implement a workflow with OFBiz. I'm using Ofbiz 12.04. I tried using the ofbiz-workflow and shark but getting a lot of errors. I'm new to OfBiz. Is there any workflow which can be intergrated with OfBiz 12.04? OSWorkflow and jBPM are the other ones that I've tried, but could not complete the integration.
Regards,
Varun |
|
|
Hi Varun044,
Due to various factors the Shark component has been sent to the attic of the project, though still being in our 12.x releases. But, I am pleased to be able to say to you that new steps are being undertaken to have a workflow mgt solution back into OFBiz again (or per change integrating with). Some community members are exploring using Activity with OFBiz. Best regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:11 AM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to implement a workflow with OFBiz. > I'm using Ofbiz 12.04. I tried using the ofbiz-workflow and shark but > getting a lot of errors. I'm new to OfBiz. > > Is there any workflow which can be intergrated with OfBiz 12.04? OSWorkflow > and jBPM are the other ones that I've tried, but could not complete the > integration. > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455.html > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > |
|
|
Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre.
So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best path? Should I check into Activiti? If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. Thanks again!
Regards,
Varun |
|
|
Varun044,
The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their willingness to work on this. These are: - Hans Bakker - Mohd Viqar - Rong Nguyen The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. Regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: > Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. > > So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best path? > Should I check into Activiti? > > If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. > > Thanks again! > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html > Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > |
|
|
I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team
can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management structure. This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to participate. This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. Ron On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: > Varun044, > > The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their > willingness to work on this. These are: > > - Hans Bakker > - Mohd Viqar > - Rong Nguyen > > The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. > > Regards, > > Pierre Smits > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > Services & Solutions for Cloud- > Based Manufacturing, Professional > Services and Retail & Trade > http://www.orrtiz.com > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >> >> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best path? >> Should I check into Activiti? >> >> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >> >> Thanks again! >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> -- Ron Wheeler President Artifact Software Inc email: [hidden email] skype: ronaldmwheeler phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 |
|
|
That is a excelent suggestion, Ron.
Regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Ron Wheeler <[hidden email] > wrote: > I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team can > decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management structure. > This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion and > decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to participate. > > This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. > > Ron > > > On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: > >> Varun044, >> >> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >> willingness to work on this. These are: >> >> - Hans Bakker >> - Mohd Viqar >> - Rong Nguyen >> >> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >> >> Regards, >> >> Pierre Smits >> >> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> Services and Retail & Trade >> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>> >>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best path? >>> Should I check into Activiti? >>> >>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>> >>> Thanks again! >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> > > > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: [hidden email] > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > > |
|
|
All right. So, lets get a workflow working in OfBiz.
Regards,
Varun |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ron Wheeler
Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of
collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: > I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team > can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management > structure. > This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion > and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to > participate. > > This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. > > Ron > > > On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >> Varun044, >> >> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >> willingness to work on this. These are: >> >> - Hans Bakker >> - Mohd Viqar >> - Rong Nguyen >> >> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >> >> Regards, >> >> Pierre Smits >> >> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >> Based Manufacturing, Professional >> Services and Retail & Trade >> http://www.orrtiz.com >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>> >>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>> path? >>> Should I check into Activiti? >>> >>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>> >>> Thanks again! >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> > > > > |
|
|
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of > collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. > Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? Is there not an open source equivalent? Cheers Ted > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > > On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >> >> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >> structure. >> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >> participate. >> >> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >> >> Ron >> >> >> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>> >>> Varun044, >>> >>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>> >>> - Hans Bakker >>> - Mohd Viqar >>> - Rong Nguyen >>> >>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Pierre Smits >>> >>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>> Services and Retail & Trade >>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>> >>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>> path? >>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>> >>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>> >>>> Thanks again! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> View this message in context: >>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>> >> >> >> >> > -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. [hidden email] |
|
|
I am sorry, I do not understand the question.
In this project, we collaborate using Jira: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ so that everyone can participate, share files, vote, etc. If the Work Flow idea requires extensive labor, then Jira can be used to break down tasks, assign people to tasks, track progress, etc. Adrian Crum Sandglass Software www.sandglass-software.com On 9/19/2014 4:34 PM, Ted Byers wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >> > > Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open > source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? > Is there not an open source equivalent? > > Cheers > > Ted > >> Adrian Crum >> Sandglass Software >> www.sandglass-software.com >> >> >> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>> >>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>> structure. >>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>> participate. >>> >>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>> >>> Ron >>> >>> >>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>> >>>> Varun044, >>>> >>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>> >>>> - Hans Bakker >>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>> >>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>> >>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>> path? >>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>> >>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks again! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> View this message in context: >>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ted Byers
They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for
that purpose. Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. Rn On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >> > Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open > source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? > Is there not an open source equivalent? > > Cheers > > Ted > >> Adrian Crum >> Sandglass Software >> www.sandglass-software.com >> >> >> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>> structure. >>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>> participate. >>> >>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>> >>> Ron >>> >>> >>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>> Varun044, >>>> >>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>> >>>> - Hans Bakker >>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>> >>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Pierre Smits >>>> >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>> >>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>> path? >>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>> >>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks again! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> View this message in context: >>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>> >>> >>> >>> > > -- Ron Wheeler President Artifact Software Inc email: [hidden email] skype: ronaldmwheeler phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Adrian Crum-3
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Adrian Crum
<[hidden email]> wrote: > I am sorry, I do not understand the question. > > In this project, we collaborate using Jira: > Yes, I saw that. I visited Atlassian's site and observed that it is proprietary, and use of it carries a cost. I have no problem with using commercial software, but I was curious as to who pays for the license to use Jira. And, I was curious as to a) whether or not there is an open source equivalent to Jira, and b) if so, how the comparison with such software still led to use of Jira. It is like one using MS Word for creating documents, when there is Open Office and now Libre Office as open source equivalents (I like, and use, all three, though I am starting to prefer the latter two as I find the latest version of MS Office confusing and can't find some of the features I used to use). I can see rational arguments for using any of the three products, based on cost, features, preferences, platforms on which they will operate, &c. But, I do not know what open source products are equivalent to Jira, or even if there are any, and how they compare. So, I am asking nothing more than who bears the cost of using Jira, and then, what open source alternatives exist and how do they compare? Cheers Ted > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ > > so that everyone can participate, share files, vote, etc. > > If the Work Flow idea requires extensive labor, then Jira can be used to > break down tasks, assign people to tasks, track progress, etc. > > > Adrian Crum > Sandglass Software > www.sandglass-software.com > > On 9/19/2014 4:34 PM, Ted Byers wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>> >> >> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >> Is there not an open source equivalent? >> >> Cheers >> >> Ted >> >>> Adrian Crum >>> Sandglass Software >>> www.sandglass-software.com >>> >>> >>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>> structure. >>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>> participate. >>>> >>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>> >>>> Ron >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Varun044, >>>>> >>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>> >>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>> >>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>> path? >>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> > -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ron Wheeler
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler
<[hidden email]> wrote: > They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for > that purpose. > Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues > that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. > I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they compare. As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content management system. But then, if the available options for particular tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously open source) products while adding code to address perceived deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes good reasons for doing this too). But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in the not too distant future. I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with what is presently in place. Cheers Ted > Rn > > On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>> >> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >> Is there not an open source equivalent? >> >> Cheers >> >> Ted >> >>> Adrian Crum >>> Sandglass Software >>> www.sandglass-software.com >>> >>> >>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>> >>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>> structure. >>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>> participate. >>>> >>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>> >>>> Ron >>>> >>>> >>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Varun044, >>>>> >>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>> >>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>> >>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>> >>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>> path? >>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>> >>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: [hidden email] > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. [hidden email] |
Administrator
|
Atlassian provides graciously tools like Jira and Confluence to the ASF.
Did you know that Jira underneath uses the OFBiz Entity Engine? Jacques Le 19/09/2014 18:20, Ted Byers a écrit : > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >> that purpose. >> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues >> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >> > I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to > who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am > curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they > compare. > > As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were > involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have > suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, > whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of > developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for > content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz > WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content > management system. But then, if the available options for particular > tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to > the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously > open source) products while adding code to address perceived > deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes > good reasons for doing this too). > > But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the > present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that > led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable > alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in > the not too distant future. > > I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, > especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with > what is presently in place. > > Cheers > > Ted > >> Rn >> >> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>> >>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Ted >>> >>>> Adrian Crum >>>> Sandglass Software >>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>> structure. >>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>> participate. >>>>> >>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> Ron >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>> >>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>> >>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>> path? >>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Ron Wheeler >> President >> Artifact Software Inc >> email: [hidden email] >> skype: ronaldmwheeler >> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >> > > |
|
|
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Jacques Le Roux
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Atlassian provides graciously tools like Jira and Confluence to the ASF. That suggests a healthy relationship between the open source sector and the commercial sector. That is nice to see. > Did you know that Jira underneath uses the OFBiz Entity Engine? > No I didn't, How, then, does the Jira feature set compare with the features provided in OFBiz for work flow management and issue tracking? BTW, I have lately taken a closer look at Redmine, and am curious as to how it's feature set (with some of the more interesting Redmine plugins), compares with Jira. Cheers Ted > Jacques > > Le 19/09/2014 18:20, Ted Byers a écrit : > >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >>> that purpose. >>> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the >>> issues >>> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >>> >> I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to >> who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am >> curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they >> compare. >> >> As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were >> involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have >> suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, >> whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of >> developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for >> content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz >> WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content >> management system. But then, if the available options for particular >> tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to >> the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously >> open source) products while adding code to address perceived >> deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes >> good reasons for doing this too). >> >> But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the >> present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that >> led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable >> alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in >> the not too distant future. >> >> I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, >> especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with >> what is presently in place. >> >> Cheers >> >> Ted >> >>> Rn >>> >>> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>>> >>>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>>> structure. >>>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>>> participate. >>>>>> >>>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>>> path? >>>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ron Wheeler >>> President >>> Artifact Software Inc >>> email: [hidden email] >>> skype: ronaldmwheeler >>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >>> >> >> > -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ted Byers
Forgive the amateur-speak, but would it be ok to invent an abstracted
layer of vendor-neutral APIs & service bindings & such forth that engenders implementation interest among entities like SugarCRM and its competitors? It'd be kind of like what SQL did for the database industry, or what CMIS is doing for content management. How about docker-friendly OFBiz modules & components? That coupled with "standards" at the transport/messaging/whatever layer would make OFBiz very customizable, at least for *NIX admins. Check out this infomercial: https://coreos.com/blog/coreos-just-got-easier-to-try-with-panamax/ In any case, adapt or die. As an Alfresco user, I offer thanks to those considering Activiti workflow integration for OFBiz. Now if I could only make some progress up the learning curve for this project ... On 14-09-19 09:20 AM, Ted Byers wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >> that purpose. >> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues >> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >> > > I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to > who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am > curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they > compare. > > As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were > involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have > suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, > whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of > developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for > content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz > WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content > management system. But then, if the available options for particular > tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to > the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously > open source) products while adding code to address perceived > deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes > good reasons for doing this too). > > But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the > present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that > led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable > alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in > the not too distant future. > > I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, > especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with > what is presently in place. > > Cheers > > Ted > >> Rn >> >> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>> >>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Ted >>> >>>> Adrian Crum >>>> Sandglass Software >>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>> structure. >>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>> participate. >>>>> >>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> Ron >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>> >>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>> >>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>> path? >>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Ron Wheeler >> President >> Artifact Software Inc >> email: [hidden email] >> skype: ronaldmwheeler >> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >> > > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ted Byers
No one is suggesting using JIRA as part of OFBiz. (As Jacques points out
parts of OFBiz are used in JIRA as a development framework.) The suggestion was to use JIRA as an issue tracking system to help manage the Workflow project. The suggested technical base for Workflow is Activiti (read the start of this conversation at the end of this page). Your suggestions about SugarCRM and WordPress are in the right direction but these use underlying technologies (PHP) that are not easy to integrate into a java project. Your comments about not "reinventing the wheel" are spot on but if you contribute to the Workflow Project, you will have a chance to see how easy it is to integrate two products(OFBiz and Activiti) which may have completely different frameworks under the business layer. Ron On 19/09/2014 12:20 PM, Ted Byers wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >> that purpose. >> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues >> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >> > I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to > who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am > curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they > compare. > > As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were > involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have > suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, > whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of > developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for > content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz > WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content > management system. But then, if the available options for particular > tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to > the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously > open source) products while adding code to address perceived > deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes > good reasons for doing this too). > > But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the > present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that > led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable > alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in > the not too distant future. > > I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, > especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with > what is presently in place. > > Cheers > > Ted > >> Rn >> >> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>> >>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Ted >>> >>>> Adrian Crum >>>> Sandglass Software >>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>> structure. >>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>> participate. >>>>> >>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>> >>>>> Ron >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>> >>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>> >>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>> >>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>> >>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>> path? >>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Ron Wheeler >> President >> Artifact Software Inc >> email: [hidden email] >> skype: ronaldmwheeler >> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >> > > -- Ron Wheeler President Artifact Software Inc email: [hidden email] skype: ronaldmwheeler phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Todd Thorner
Of course Todd. All that you're suggesting is fine, as long as there
is a rational argument for doing it (and in many cases there is - I just ask that if I involve myself in a project, I know what that argument is). I am not about to develop a new CRM de novo, when there exists products like SugarCRM. It would be different in only two cases: 1) the existing products are immature and unreliable and the effort to make them adequate for use in production is greater than the cost to start again de movo, and 2) the product is mature and quite usable, but lacks support for a key, and essential feature, and the architecture used makes adding support for the missing feature impracticable. If there is a product that satisfies most of my requirements, I am most likely to develop new code just to add support to that product for the features(s) I require that are not already there. Now, commercial entities, with big bucks to invest, may well want to develop a new entry for a given market, just because they can; but that is based on a perceived opportunity and a belief they can produce a better product than those that currently exist and so out-compete the existing products/providers. But that is a completely different situation that I have not experienced directly, and am not likely to. Cheers Ted On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Todd Thorner <[hidden email]> wrote: > Forgive the amateur-speak, but would it be ok to invent an abstracted > layer of vendor-neutral APIs & service bindings & such forth that > engenders implementation interest among entities like SugarCRM and its > competitors? It'd be kind of like what SQL did for the database > industry, or what CMIS is doing for content management. > > How about docker-friendly OFBiz modules & components? That coupled with > "standards" at the transport/messaging/whatever layer would make OFBiz > very customizable, at least for *NIX admins. Check out this > infomercial: > https://coreos.com/blog/coreos-just-got-easier-to-try-with-panamax/ > > In any case, adapt or die. As an Alfresco user, I offer thanks to those > considering Activiti workflow integration for OFBiz. Now if I could > only make some progress up the learning curve for this project ... > > > > On 14-09-19 09:20 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >>> that purpose. >>> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues >>> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >>> >> >> I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to >> who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am >> curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they >> compare. >> >> As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were >> involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have >> suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, >> whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of >> developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for >> content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz >> WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content >> management system. But then, if the available options for particular >> tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to >> the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously >> open source) products while adding code to address perceived >> deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes >> good reasons for doing this too). >> >> But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the >> present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that >> led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable >> alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in >> the not too distant future. >> >> I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, >> especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with >> what is presently in place. >> >> Cheers >> >> Ted >> >>> Rn >>> >>> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>>> >>>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>>> structure. >>>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>>> participate. >>>>>> >>>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>>> path? >>>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ron Wheeler >>> President >>> Artifact Software Inc >>> email: [hidden email] >>> skype: ronaldmwheeler >>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >>> >> >> >> -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ron Wheeler
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Ron Wheeler
<[hidden email]> wrote: > No one is suggesting using JIRA as part of OFBiz. (As Jacques points out > parts of OFBiz are used in JIRA as a development framework.) > Nor was I. I was just curious about how the workflow features already in OFbiz compared with what is in Jira (or, in other words, what Atlassian added). > > The suggestion was to use JIRA as an issue tracking system to help manage > the Workflow project. > Ok, not a stretch there as it is already used by ASF. > The suggested technical base for Workflow is Activiti (read the start of > this conversation at the end of this page). > OK. But then, I'd be interested in a comparison of Jira with Activiti with what is already in OFBiz. ;-) > Your suggestions about SugarCRM and WordPress are in the right direction but > these use underlying technologies (PHP) that are not easy to integrate into > a java project. > If it were easy, everyone would have done it. ;-) But seriously, it is not much different from the old days when I routinely mixed FORTRAN, C and C++ (and could do now also with C# and Java. They are just technologies that support web applications. The hardest 'task' would in my view be proper session management, I am, right now, working on a project that mixes web services written in Java, as Java servlets, with a web service written in Perl, and communicating with each other, over TLS, using the SOAP variant of XML. Seriously, this mixing of technologies isn't rocket science. It just needs someone with sufficient experience with all the technologies in the mix. > Your comments about not "reinventing the wheel" are spot on but if you > contribute to the Workflow Project, you will have a chance to see how easy > it is to integrate two products(OFBiz and Activiti) which may have > completely different frameworks under the business layer. > I will watch closely (so keep sending updates to this forum), but it may be a year or three before I have time to contribute in any significant way. My work load has gone insane, and I am now routinely putting in 12 to 14 hours a day 7 days a week. I don't think, at my age, I can keep up that pace much longer. Cheers Ted > > Ron > > > > On 19/09/2014 12:20 PM, Ted Byers wrote: >> >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >>> that purpose. >>> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the >>> issues >>> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >>> >> I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to >> who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am >> curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they >> compare. >> >> As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were >> involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have >> suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, >> whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of >> developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for >> content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz >> WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content >> management system. But then, if the available options for particular >> tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to >> the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously >> open source) products while adding code to address perceived >> deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes >> good reasons for doing this too). >> >> But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the >> present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that >> led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable >> alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in >> the not too distant future. >> >> I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, >> especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with >> what is presently in place. >> >> Cheers >> >> Ted >> >>> Rn >>> >>> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>>> >>>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>>> structure. >>>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>>> participate. >>>>>> >>>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>>> path? >>>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ron Wheeler >>> President >>> Artifact Software Inc >>> email: [hidden email] >>> skype: ronaldmwheeler >>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >>> >> >> > > > -- > Ron Wheeler > President > Artifact Software Inc > email: [hidden email] > skype: ronaldmwheeler > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D. [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ted Byers
Thank you, sir, for taking time out of your day to explain a few things.
Most of it is penetrating a certain thick skull. On 14-09-19 11:05 AM, Ted Byers wrote: > Of course Todd. All that you're suggesting is fine, as long as there > is a rational argument for doing it (and in many cases there is - I > just ask that if I involve myself in a project, I know what that > argument is). > > I am not about to develop a new CRM de novo, when there exists > products like SugarCRM. It would be different in only two cases: 1) > the existing products are immature and unreliable and the effort to > make them adequate for use in production is greater than the cost to > start again de movo, and 2) the product is mature and quite usable, > but lacks support for a key, and essential feature, and the > architecture used makes adding support for the missing feature > impracticable. If there is a product that satisfies most of my > requirements, I am most likely to develop new code just to add support > to that product for the features(s) I require that are not already > there. > > Now, commercial entities, with big bucks to invest, may well want to > develop a new entry for a given market, just because they can; but > that is based on a perceived opportunity and a belief they can produce > a better product than those that currently exist and so out-compete > the existing products/providers. But that is a completely different > situation that I have not experienced directly, and am not likely to. > > Cheers > > Ted > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Todd Thorner <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Forgive the amateur-speak, but would it be ok to invent an abstracted >> layer of vendor-neutral APIs & service bindings & such forth that >> engenders implementation interest among entities like SugarCRM and its >> competitors? It'd be kind of like what SQL did for the database >> industry, or what CMIS is doing for content management. >> >> How about docker-friendly OFBiz modules & components? That coupled with >> "standards" at the transport/messaging/whatever layer would make OFBiz >> very customizable, at least for *NIX admins. Check out this >> infomercial: >> https://coreos.com/blog/coreos-just-got-easier-to-try-with-panamax/ >> >> In any case, adapt or die. As an Alfresco user, I offer thanks to those >> considering Activiti workflow integration for OFBiz. Now if I could >> only make some progress up the learning curve for this project ... >> >> >> >> On 14-09-19 09:20 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler >>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >>>> that purpose. >>>> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the issues >>>> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >>>> >>> >>> I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to >>> who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am >>> curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they >>> compare. >>> >>> As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were >>> involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have >>> suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, >>> whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of >>> developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for >>> content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz >>> WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content >>> management system. But then, if the available options for particular >>> tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to >>> the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously >>> open source) products while adding code to address perceived >>> deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes >>> good reasons for doing this too). >>> >>> But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the >>> present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that >>> led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable >>> alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in >>> the not too distant future. >>> >>> I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, >>> especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with >>> what is presently in place. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Ted >>> >>>> Rn >>>> >>>> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>>>> >>>>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>>>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>>>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Ted >>>>> >>>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>>>> structure. >>>>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>>>> participate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ron >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>>>> path? >>>>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ron Wheeler >>>> President >>>> Artifact Software Inc >>>> email: [hidden email] >>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler >>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >>>> >>> >>> >>> > > > |
«
Return to OFBiz - User
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |