Re: OFBiz data load - Documentation

[Axel Van Noten-2]

I woke up with a lot of text to read here in Brussels. I was about to make a detailed answer on your "How would you like things to work?" when I found out somebody linked ofbiz.apache.org 'Documentation' to a page I haven't seen before. I'm gonna end up believing in Santa Claus again!
 
I would have started to order by release like the examples below - there must be a reason why people are ordering by release - :

 

Windows

http://www.microsoft.com/enable/products/docs/default.aspx

 

Apache http

http://httpd.apache.org/docs/

 

Derby (guess some Armonk(NY) based IT company had a hand in this one)

http://db.apache.org/derby/manuals/index.html

 

(couldn't check Oracle because the link is broken :-)  - way to go Lary! - : http://www.oracle.com/technology/documentation/index.html )

 

Nevertheless it is looking really neat compared with where it came from. I'll be traveling the next three weeks, but I will certainly try to update something if I come across.

 

Have a nice day,

Axel

 

 

> Subject: Re: OFBiz data load - Documentation
> From: [hidden email]
> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 19:38:52 -0600
> To: [hidden email]
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2010, at 5:17 PM, Axel Van Noten wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm an economist, and I don't believe I can analyse the present.
>
> That's good. Then you have some understanding of market forces and motivations. The trick is how to get people to do things, and on top of that how to get them to work with others to do things. With code there are lots of reasons to collaborate, and some of the nature of code forces people to collaborate if they want to work on similar things. With documentation there is not only a problem with people finding reasons to work on it and contribute things, but even more there is a problem of getting people to collaborate to better organize things and reduce duplication of effort.
>
> > I don't see how I can help to change the structure of the documentation. If I can edit the cwiki I'be glad to change the hierarchy as proposed.
>
> Ironically one of the places with the least collaboration is in organizing things. Everyone who works on it seems to come in and impose a top-down structure and start (but usually not finish) putting things in that structure, or they go bottom up and start organizing things and grouping similar things. With the second approach there is also rarely finishing, but at least the progress can be somewhat cumulative.
>
> You can certainly change things. We have an open space that anyone with an account can modify:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ
>
> If you're going to go with the top-down approach I mentioned above, I'd recommend doing it in a series of pages that point to other pages rather than changing the actual hierarchy (I'm actually rather surprised that with so many programmers about people haven't done more of this approach).
>
> There are spaces that don't allow just anyone to edit them, including the end-user and technical documentation spaces:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH
>
> The maverick nature of documentation so far clearly shows here... as there is a lot to be desired in terms of volume and polish of the documentation. To see even more of the maverick nature of doc efforts, you can also look around at the various external sites with documentation on them.
>
> > If it will never change, so be it. I just believe it's a pity of this work, people getting started and not finding the f****** manual.
>
> Well, to start with try this page (if you haven't already):
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/OFBiz+Documentation+Index
>
> Of course, even there you'll notice that it is heavy on technical documentation.
>
> I guess in general there just isn't as much end-user documentation, if that's what you're looking for, and what there is tends to be scattered about in the open space (ie the confluence/display/OFBIZ URL above).
>
> BTW, my opinion on how end-user documentation should be organized is by business process. This would look something like the structure here:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBREQDES/Universal+Business+Process+Library+Index
>
> I've been trying to find time to get back to this and add an overlap analysis to the process stories. That overlap analysis would basically end up as an process-organized overview of where to find things in the applications, though it wouldn't be any sort of complete description of how to use things and what things mean.
>
> Anyway, that's an overview of what's there and some ideas about moving forward. That said, how would you like things to work and how are they different from what's around now?
>
> -David
>
>
> >
> >> Subject: Re: OFBiz data load - Documentation
> >> From: [hidden email]
> >> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:15:45 -0600
> >> To: [hidden email]
> >>
> >>
> >> I think you're right Jacques, though I also think it's a natural and maybe not a bad thing.
> >>
> >> Most people in the world aren't investing in much right now, even those who have time and/or money to invest, because they don't expect much of a return on the investment. Any successful investor will tell you that it's best to get into things when it is cheap to invest (ie when others don't expect a return and aren't investing), and then get out when the market is great (when others do expect a return and are investing a lot). However, the same people will often fail to recognize that such conditions are not only impossible to predict in the future, but also impossible to recognize in the present, and they further fail to recognize that the fact that they were able to invest in a low market and get out when the market picked up was probably just the luck of timing. Just ask any honest economist (if you can find one!)... they can't even accurately analyze the present, let alone predict the future... even if they are asked to every day.
> >>
> >> Anyway, the point of all of that is that yes there isn't as much activity in OFBiz right now. I think this is natural given that most end-user organizations have pulled back their budgets significantly. That makes sense because the sectors where OFBiz has been strongest (at least from my experience) are getting hit really hard right now and many companies are not just cutting back, but totally failing. End-user organizations have always been about 90% of my work, but are now down to 0%... and I haven't designed or built anything for one in almost a year now. Fortunately there are other types of companies out there, but one way or another the demand for OFBiz is WAY down as the industries and sizes of businesses it serves are hit so hard.
> >>
> >> From the perspective of the project what does this matter? Unlike a company a non-profit community-driven open source project has no liabilities and there is no way it can just disappear (unless no one is using it, ie it falls into irrelevancy). Even if somehow the ASF failed to get adequate donations of money or server time to keep hosting the project, it could be hosted elsewhere, or even turn into some crazy peer managed ecosystem using distributed git repositories (some people would love that, but I think it would be a nightmare for both contributors and users).
> >>
> >> In any case, the worst case scenario is that the project slows down a little bit. If we're lucky people won't lose too much hope and will continue to invest in open source projects like OFBiz, which is really an investment that developers do in hopes of getting more and better work in the future. If people don't feel much hope for that then chances are they won't invest as much, and maybe just the hobbyists who want to develop neat stuff will be contributing.
> >>
> >> Sooner or later things will of course pick up, and then we'll be back to complaints about too much going into the project instead of complaints about not enough. On the other hand, given an infinite potential universe of things people might want to see in OFBiz, there will ALWAYS be complaints about things missing that certain people would like to see, or things organized better for their current requirements, or wishes for free help instead of peer collaboration.
> >>
> >> Oh well, I guess enough pontificating for now, especially since I'm no pontiff.
> >>
> >> -David
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 18, 2010, at 11:48 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>
> >>> And then, those that invested much, slowly invest less...
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >>> From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
> >>>> The missing element is manpower.
> >>>> Get lots of great Ideas but not many contributors.
> >>>>
> >>>> Axel Van Noten sent the following on 1/18/2010 6:58 AM:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks, I learned a lot.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Still, I'm a little bit disappointed about the overall documentation. Would it be possible to:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) have it organised by release,
> >>>>> 2) link to it immediatly from the documentation buton (on ofbiz.apache.org), or the help button in the application,
> >>>>> 3) have a clearer structure (per release) like:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Getting Started with OFBiz
> >>>>> OFBiz End User Documentation
> >>>>> OFBiz Reference Manual
> >>>>> OFBiz Technical Guide
> >>>>> OFBiz Tools and Utilities Guide
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I know its easy to criticise, but I believe the project would gain a lot just by changing these links and making a different hierarchy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Kind regards,
> >>>>> Axel
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> >>>>> Subject Re: OFBiz data load
> >>>>> Date Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:29:38 GMT
> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/OFBiz%27s+Data+File+Tools
> >>>>> here is a good link for a lot of help
> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/FAQ+-+Tips+-+Tricks+-+Cookbook+-+HowTo
> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Handling+of+External+data
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Juan Pablo sent the following on 1/14/2010 8:42 AM:
> >>>>>> Hi Axel.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1)
> >>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/OFBiz+End+User+Docs+Home
> >>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/Home
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) http://ofbiz.markmail.org/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:30 AM, axel van noten <[hidden email]>wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I've been installing OFBiz and looking for the following information:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1) Where is the primary point can I find the most update documentation?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The documentation buton on the OFBiz website and the help button in the
> >>>>>>> application are both bringing me to the cwiki.apache site. But there seems
> >>>>>>> to be no clear structure nor a primary point where I can turn to for manuals
> >>>>>>> and documentation.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2) is there a possibility to perform a text search on this mailing list?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 3) I'm trying to load a product database into OFBiz. What would be the
> >>>>>>> appropriate way to do so? Is this documented somewhere?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for your help!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Kind regards
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Axel
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
> >>>>>>> Keep your friends updated�even when you�re not signed in.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_5:092010
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.
> >>>>> _________________________________________________________________
> >>>>> Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.
> >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_2:092009
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Keep your friends updated—even when you’re not signed in.
> > http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_5:092010
>

     
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail: Your friends can get your Facebook updates, right from Hotmail®.
http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_4:092009

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

HI David:


David E Jones wrote:

> On Jan 18, 2010, at 8:45 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>
>  
>> Why David - thanks for the endorsement! Competition is always a good thing and I welcome it as it makes me better. Let me just say, however, the ramp up time associated with OFBiz is nothing compared to writing and self-publishing. It's not as easy as it looks. And it is expensive. You can't just toss together a computer w/Linux and Java (all freebies) and hope to assemble something useful.
>>
>> And, it doesn't pay nearly as well as consulting.
>>    
>
> This is just my opinion, but I think that if you wanted to make money on proper documentation (which is probably more than a 10,000 hour effort as a rough guess) you'd have to do it along with a supported commercial distribution and a good marketing budget. In other words, if your target market size is that of whatever the OFBiz open source project (with a marketing budget of zero, conveniently the same in any currency), then your target market is pretty small.
>
>  

My intent was never to make money on documentation. I charge for the
books because it has been proven that "free" translates to "not worth
anything". My books are certainly worth "something". But, my real
objective is to develop high quality OFBiz training resources. Being a
lone wolf, I have to start somewhere. IMO there is a dearth of good
OFBiz end-user documentation. I saw a need (actually, I experienced a
need since I've lived through several generations of OFBiz without much
documentation) and as they say in  Market 101, I'm tying to meet market
demand.
> If you tried to spend on marketing for just documentation you'd have a limit of whatever OFBiz draws, or you'd have to spend enough to lift OFBiz along with your product which brings me back to the idea of doing a supported distribution in addition to marketing because the revenue potential for documentation alone is probably not adequate for that level of marketing spend, and you would also be putting capital into marketing for something you don't control.
>
>  
Agreed! It boils down to gaining mind share - which is really another
term for marketing. And marketing costs money. And I have only a limited
budget. Actually, all I have right now is my time, experience and
knowledge of OFBiz. So, there you go! It's a bootstrap operation.
>> Looking for new ventures are you? How about just invest in what I'm doing? If there is anyone out there who would like to invest in my efforts, I'm all ears! I could use a new server, some first-class editorial help, a professional indexer, professional quality publication software (something like InDesign) etc., etc., etc.
>>    
>
> I'm sorry if I made the wrong impression, when I wrote "It would be interesting to see" that's what I meant, putting me in the position of an outside observer. Not only am I not in a position to invest, I'm not even in a position to participate in a startup unless it is already well funded. I'm just a working man. Actually, it's worse than that... I'm just a failed entrepreneur with more liabilities than assets and in this labour market with growing supply and flat-lined demand I'm back to making what I did 8 years ago when OFBiz was a year old and little more than a very basic framework plus a hacked together, primitive, ecommerce package.
>
>  
You didn't leave me with the wrong impression. I wasn't asking for your
monetary investment. I'm trying to engage you in meaningful dialog so
that when I have questions about how OFBiz works or a new user makes an
attempt to solve an OFBiz problem (for example on the mailing lists),
you won't be such an ogre. Investment comes in many forms. I think you
will find if you lighten up a little and share your wisdom, you have
nothing to lose and everything to gain.

That is not to say that I wouldn't consider monetary investments from
others. I've been trying to find a way to get other people outside the
OFBiz community to get excited about this project and possibly invest.
That is another reason why I sell the books and spend way to much time
on the myOFBiz.com website. I have to prove to potential investors that
this stuff really works and what better way then to "eat my own dogfood"
with myOFBiz.com?
> I'd like to think I've learned some lessons in all of this. One is that the old saying about love does not apply at ALL to investing, and it is not better to have invested and lost than to never have invested at all. In fact, I think investing is all about timing, and I've blown it altogether. If you're starting with nothing then you never want to invest immediately should you manage to earn more than you need to live. Work like mad to make a lot of money when markets are up, but for goodness sake don't invest it then! Hoard it and wait for the market to fall apart, THEN start investing in whatever you're going to, be it people and training for a services business, assets with the hope of appreciation, intellectual property of any sort (documentation, software, whatever), or anything else. Yes, timing this well is all but impossible, but it's not like you have to cut it close. You just keep the money when you earn, and invest it when you can't so much earn any more (especially if you know others are also having trouble earning and are willing to work for peanuts to survive :) ).
>
>  
I'm sorry to hear that. I too am a working person, currently unemployed.
So, what is an unemployed, over trained, over-the-hill software engineer
to do? I'm using this time to do what I really love doing and that is
/*NOT */troubleshooting and fixing software systems - I'm really good at
that - but writing and perhaps one day providing the best OFBiz training
available to lots of new OFBiz users.
> As for consulting, it's enough to survive if you're lucky, but certainly not comfortable or secure, especially these days when the labour market is not exactly favourable. Having tried at the documentation market, I'm guess that isn't all that great either. I won't say much more about consulting though, chances are I have clients or prospective clients reading in.
>
> Since clients are probably reading in I should probably get back to work... ;)
>
> -David
>
>
>
>  

[Matt Warnock]

Found my aborted response, thought I'd pass it on FWIW, though belated.

On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 20:23 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
> Matt,
>
> It sounds like you're looking for something that a smaller company can
>  use OOTB. If that's the case, take a look at this:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBREQDES/OFBiz+EZBiz

Well, in this category, there is no such thing, really, as OOTB, though
the term gets tossed around a lot.  At least, not in the sense that a
word processor or spreadsheet is used OOTB.  

Even if the code is unchanged, databases, webapps, products, accounts,
suppliers, and customers all need to be created and/or customized.  In
most cases, where these changes are non-trivial, data also needs to be
imported from existing sources.  In many cases, they may want to import
historical data as well. (I know we do.)  Workflows will vary by
company. Still, most of the stuff may not need actual code changes from
a "standard" small business distribution.  Maybe a different ledger
account set for services vs. manufacturing vs. distribution vs. retail
(which could also include France vs. Belgium as discussed on this list
earlier).

EZBiz looks promising, but what is the proposed relationship to the
trunk code?  Is this an enhancement to OFBiz to make the user interface
and setup a bit easier?  Or is it a separate "OFBiz Lite" that strips
away some of the complexity to make it easier at first?  I'd be much
more interested in the former than the latter.  

Most Windows software, for example, has "Express Install" which most
users choose, and "Custom/Expert Install" that you can use if you need
to change the defaults.  Debian usually installs a safe (but often
nonfunctional) version of the package, which requires a heavy learning
curve to configure for practical use (e.g. exim, dhcpd, bind9, samba,
apache2).  If EZBiz created a "default" OOTB configuration suitable for
small business, perhaps with a choice of accounts generally suitable for
different types of businesses (distribution, manufacturing, services) or
different countries.  While customization and configuration would still
be required, the process of getting to a working and useful
configuration would be GREATLY reduced.  

One thing about small companies is that they can change easily,
especially to adopt "best practices" that they believe they will need
later anyway.  They would rather change the organization to meet "best
practices" than remake the software to fit what they happen to do at the
moment, which may or may not be best practices anyway.  Larger companies
are more willing/able to tweak the software to the organization, and
have more experience with best practices and more invested in their
current practice.  

So small companies don't need customization and fringe development,
NEARLY as much as support, advice, data transfer, best practices, and so
on.  But any company that uses OFBiz, is natually a potential client for
future enhancement as they grow, and as their needs change.  And once
they are committed to using OFBiz, they are more likely to accept both
the Open Source model and the idea of releasing the changes back to the
community.  And of course, adding on to the software they know and use
is a LOT more attractive than starting over.

> However, please understand that this not only may never be designed all
>  the way, it also may never be built. It is about 80% a hobby project
>  and even though I'm interested in working on it (apparently I'm
>  basically the only one), I don't have much hope of increasing personal
>  income for it and I think others feel the same way about it. People
>  need some reason to contribute to this and invest in it, and for
>  something like this people have to dig pretty deep to find a reason.

I have heard you say things like this a couple of times on this list,
and that is exactly my concern.  It sounds like you may be getting
burned out because either 1) no one wants to help, or 2) no one can (or
knows how).  There is a lot of volunteerism in the world, so I figure if
you aren't getting the help you would like, it may not be as easy to
help as it needs to be.  All the good intentions in the world can't
scale a steep learning curve.

> OFBiz doesn't exist and isn't what it is in spite of being
>  community-driven, OFBiz exists and is what it is precisely because it
>  is community-driven. If someone wants something that they'll get for
>  free and not have to change for their business, I'm guessing they're
>  not going to find it in a community-driven open source project (they
>  may find it in a commercial product that uses open source for
>  marketing purposes).

Agreed.  And like I said, there really is no OOTB in this game.  But we
have at least a couple of forks to date to add commercial stuff to
OFBiz, which seems symptomatic of unmet needs or expectations, and
perhaps of inadequate market penetration (or community support) to
really accelerate development in the main trunk.  

Still, quite without wanting something for nothing, it does seem
reasonable to expect that *MOST* of OFBiz functionality would not
require THAT much customizing, especially for small business.  80% of
most businesses is, after all, the same.  Services or products,
accounting, shipping, receiving, AP, AR, payroll, etc.  Each of these is
different for each country (as the discussions on this list show).  But
within each country, most businesses do the same things, with relatively
minor variations.  Silverston develops this 80/20 idea at some length.

I once heard about a guy who went from sales in the electronics
manufacturing business to the custom label business.  When asked about
the difference between the industries, he said "well, we don't have much
of a warranty return problem".  Moral: most business is SSDD-- Same
Stuff, Different Day (or address).  

> Perhaps that'll change for OFBiz and we'll get at least more
>  collaboration in requirements gathering and design, but so far I'm
>  pretty much a lone wolf there too (ie I've failed to get others
>  interested in participating). The main starting point for that is
>  here:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBREQDES/Universal+Business+Process+Library+Index
>
> with a good introduction to the effort here:
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBREQDES/UBPL+Introduction
>

These are interesting.  I looked at a few (not all or even most) and
found they were more outline than fleshed out, but a good start.  If you
have an area where they are more fully fleshed out to use as a model, I
would be happy to try to flesh others out in a similar way and to a
similar level of detail.  If you don't have such an area, but would
suggest one, I could start with that.  Perhaps we could build a process
to get feedback from the community-- best practices are subject to
debate and are anything but universal.

(After reading the HEMP books:)  You favor a more spartan approach than
I am used to seeing, so maybe they are pretty well fleshed out.  If I
can help, let me know how and where.  In my experience, the whys need to
be documented in some fashion-- if not, you rethink the same issues
every time a problem comes up, and time can be wasted.  

> Being a smaller company is certainly not a problem. In fact, OFBiz is
>  built and maintained entirely by individuals and small companies.  It
>  would be great to have lunch with you sometime and chat about what
>  you're doing these days, and how you'd like to participate more in
>  OFBiz. Unfortunately we'll probably have to do that remotely. I'm only
>  in Utah every so often these days (in Texas now), and probably won't
>  be for at least another 6 weeks or so.

Call my office at 801-978-9633 sometime next week, and we'll chat.  I'd
still like to take you to lunch next time you are in town, so let me
know when you are in.  

> BTW, as far as investments go we seem to be in an era where commercial
>  derivative works startups are dominating (ie industry specific ERP and
>  such). It would be interesting to see other types of ventures, like
>  some documentation competition for Ruth's MyOFBiz.com, or some
>  commercial distribution with support, or other such things.

Commercial distribution with support seems like a very workable model.
Worked for RedHat and Ubuntu.  Customization should be huge if there is
an adequate user base.  Competing documentation, at this stage, is
asking for overlapping effort, unless there is some way to coordinate
efforts and a willingness to do so.  Once the community is deep enough,
that will grow organically (like Apache, Samba, or LDAP).  

> -David
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Matt Warnock wrote:
>
> > David:
> >
> > You may not remember me, but we met when you worked with Stephen Loosli.
> > I think he will remember me too-- I helped him try to raise venture
> > capital through Wayne Brown Institute.
> >
> > I think Jacques has some good points.  As a newcomer to the project (but
> > who has watched it from the outside for several years now), I think the
> > project currently has a learning curve that is both intimidating to new
> > users, and perhaps much higher than it needs to be.  
> >
> > Open source projects really only grow and flower when they get a
> > critical mass of users and developers that can take over the bulk of the
> > development effort.  Compare NetBSD to Linux, for example.  One uses the
> > cathedral model, the other the bazaar.  The more users you have, the
> > more developers you get (although that is never a 1:1 proposition).
> > Open source is all about "scratching your own itch", so the more users
> > you have, the more itches (of all varieties) you have that need
> > scratching, and the faster the project develops, though still perhaps
> > never in the direction any one person wants.
> >
> > But you also make some interesting observations, that I would like to
> > comment on.
> >
> > On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 14:15 -0600, David E Jones wrote:
> >> I think you're right Jacques, though I also think it's a natural and
> >> maybe not a bad thing.
> >
> > Agreed-- human behavior is a natural thing, and probably not bad, though
> > often problematic if we have not properly incented or encouraged the
> > behavior we want or expect.  
> >
> >> Most people in the world aren't investing in much right now, even those
> >> who have time and/or money to invest, because they don't expect much
> >> of a return on the investment. Any successful investor will tell you
> >> that it's best to get into things when it is cheap to invest (ie when
> >> others don't expect a return and aren't investing), and then get out
> >> when the market is great (when others do expect a return and are
> >> investing a lot). However, the same people will often fail to
> >> recognize that such conditions are not only impossible to predict in
> >> the future, but also impossible to recognize in the present, and they
> >> further fail to recognize that the fact that they were able to invest
> >> in a low market and get out when the market picked up was probably
> >> just the luck of timing. Just ask any honest economist (if you can
> >> find one!)... they can't even accurately analyze the present, let
> >> alone predict the future... even if they are asked to every day.
> >
> > Which means that this is the best time (economically, on the macro
> > level) to invest, right?  
> >
> > Or perhaps (on the micro level) the reason people aren't investing is
> > that they are having a hard time seeing the potential payoff in whatever
> > micro-environment you are looking at, including OFBiz.  
> >
> > The CPI was down 0.4% in 2009, the biggest loss since about 1955 (before
> > I was born).  Yet our business was up over 10%.  Best Buy was up over
> > 25%.  People are spending money-- just not where they can't see or
> > expect an immediate return.
> >
> >> Anyway, the point of all of that is that yes there isn't as much
> >> activity in OFBiz right now. I think this is natural given that most
> >> end-user organizations have pulled back their budgets significantly.
> >> That makes sense because the sectors where OFBiz has been strongest
> >> (at least from my experience) are getting hit really hard right now
> >> and many companies are not just cutting back, but totally failing.
> >> End-user organizations have always been about 90% of my work, but are
> >> now down to 0%... and I haven't designed or built anything for one in
> >> almost a year now. Fortunately there are other types of companies out
> >> there, but one way or another the demand for OFBiz is WAY down as the
> >> industries and sizes of businesses it serves are hit so hard.
> >
> > I was tempted to pull the trigger on OFBiz a year or two ago, but was
> > quoted $10,000 just to customize it for our company, and it was not at
> > all clear to me 1) what I would get for that sum, and 2) how long it
> > would take.  That is a hard proposition to sell to your management team.
> >
> >> From the perspective of the project what does this matter? Unlike a
> >> company a non-profit community-driven open source project has no
> >> liabilities and there is no way it can just disappear (unless no one
> >> is using it, ie it falls into irrelevancy). Even if somehow the ASF
> >> failed to get adequate donations of money or server time to keep
> >> hosting the project, it could be hosted elsewhere, or even turn into
> >> some crazy peer managed ecosystem using distributed git repositories
> >> (some people would love that, but I think it would be a nightmare for
> >> both contributors and users).
> >
> > Irrelevancy is the risk, as you point out.  The best software in the
> > world goes nowhere if no one uses it.   As as Microsoft has shown for
> > years, crappy software rules the world, if everyone uses it.
> >
> >> In any case, the worst case scenario is that the project slows down a
> >> little bit. If we're lucky people won't lose too much hope and will
> >> continue to invest in open source projects like OFBiz, which is really
> >> an investment that developers do in hopes of getting more and better
> >> work in the future. If people don't feel much hope for that then
> >> chances are they won't invest as much, and maybe just the hobbyists
> >> who want to develop neat stuff will be contributing.
> >
> > Unless the slowdown is an indication of a project getting too heavy to
> > support its own weight.  I hope that isn't the case, but if "free" isn't
> > a draw in a bad economy, that may be an indicator of a more serious
> > problem.  
> >
> > Asking developers to contribute in the hopes of future work is putting
> > the cart before the horse, IMHO.  Instead, offer a product that gives an
> > immediate return without cost, and new users will come in.  Once in,
> > they will need to scratch their own itch, which results in further
> > development of discrete additions/functions funded by businesses that
> > need them.  They would rather build an integrated solution onto OFBiz,
> > than scab a proprietary solution onto the outside somewhere and deal
> > with data import/export.  
> >
> >> Sooner or later things will of course pick up, and then we'll be back
> >> to complaints about too much going into the project instead
> >> complaints about not enough. On the other hand, given an infinite
> >> potential universe of things people might want to see in OFBiz, there
> >> will ALWAYS be complaints about things missing that certain people
> >> would like to see, or things organized better for their current
> >> requirements, or wishes for free help instead of peer collaboration.
> >
> > If the framework develops in a way that unnecessary features and
> > complexity can be safely ignored by newbies, they will still use it. If
> > they feel overwhelmed, they won't.  
> >
> > There is a reason that Linux and OpenOffice are widely used, while TeX
> > and GIMP are not.  Easy-to-use distributions, and familiar user
> > interfaces make all the difference.  
> >
> > By the same token, cars (and software) are sold by test driving.  If it
> > isn't easy and comfortable to drive, it isn't easy to sell.  We all hate
> > the VCR that is so complicated, we can't have forgotten how to set the
> > clock.  OFBiz looks to me like a hot rod project with a great drive
> > train, fat tires, and great cornering, but no seats yet (let alone seat
> > belts, widows, etc).  You put a bucket upside down behind the wheel and
> > say "try it out, you can trim out the interior any way you want, for a
> > fee".  You may get some buyers, but that is definitely the hard way to
> > sell a car.  
> >
> >> Oh well, I guess enough pontificating for now, especially since I'm no
> >> pontiff.
> >> -David
> >
> > Don't get me wrong, I think OFBiz is a great project.  But it tends
> > toward massive complexity that may be drowning its initial or perceived
> > utility, at least OOTB.  
> >
> > I think OFBiz has the best data model I have ever seen.  The cost of
> > that is complexity.  OFBiz has nearly 1000 tables, OpenERP less than 200
> > IIRC.  That makes it hard to get your head around.  Simple things like
> > importing standard CSR leads seem unnecessarily complex-- parties,
> > organizations, addresses and phones all in SEPARATE tables.  While I
> > understand the value, that flexibility comes at a cost.
> >
> > Having said all that, I have just discovered the documentation at:
> > http://demo.ofbiz.org/cmssite/cms/APACHE_OFBIZ_HTML
> > which appears promising in organization, but is not written or
> > translated by native English speakers.  I LOVE the fact that it is
> > incorporated right into the distributed source code, so up to date
> > (theoretically) with the distribution.
> >
> > If I could suggest some priorities, they would be as follows:
> >
> > 1) Make good documentation that is easy to find (part of the system is
> > great).  Index it and cross-link it extensively.  Most important, start
> > with a gentle primer on how to kick the tires and start to use the
> > system.
> >
> > 2) Create a setup process that makes it easy to customize for a new user
> > to get started, with its own process flow.  I'm thinking a turbo-tax
> > type wizard that steps you through the process.  Maybe 1) load demo data
> > to demo (but not to start real use); 2) configure the system (root app,
> > ports, etc); 3) load company data from various sources (a spreadsheet
> > for employees, a text file of customers, a list of GL accounts, etc).
> >
> > 3) Show off some features for an immediate and perceptible return.
> > Maybe an inventory dashboard or something.  Print some invoices, show
> > outstanding purchase orders, or SOMETHING that makes the user say OK,
> > now THAT I can use immediately.
> >
> > But as you correctly point out, suggestions are cheap, it's helping that
> > makes things happen.  I'd love to take you to lunch and see how I can
> > help.  We are a small company, without a huge budget, but we do have
> > some, and I would like to help make the project better.  Perhaps we can
> > bring some accounting and business management experience to the project.
> > Drop me a note, I'm in Salt Lake City and would like to see you again if
> > you are still in the vicinity somewhere.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 18, 2010, at 11:48 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >>
> >>> And then, those that invested much, slowly invest less...
> >>>
> >>> Jacques
> >>>
> >>> From: "BJ Freeman" <[hidden email]>
> >>>> The missing element is manpower.
> >>>> Get lots of great Ideas but not many contributors
> >>>>
> >>>> Axel Van Noten sent the following on 1/18/2010 6:58 AM:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks, I learned a lot.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Still, I'm a little bit disappointed about the overall documentation. Would it be possible to:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) have it organised by release,
> >>>>> 2) link to it immediatly from the documentation buton (on ofbiz.apache.org), or the help button in the application,
> >>>>> 3) have a clearer structure (per release) like:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>          Getting Started with OFBiz
> >>>>>          OFBiz End User Documentation
> >>>>>          OFBiz Reference Manual
> >>>>>          OFBiz Technical Guide
> >>>>>          OFBiz Tools and Utilities Guide
> >>>>>              ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I know its easy to criticise, but I believe the project would gain a lot just by changing these links and making a different hierarchy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Kind regards,
> >>>>> Axel
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From BJ Freeman <[hidden email]>
> >>>>> Subject Re: OFBiz data load
> >>>>> Date Thu, 14 Jan 2010 19:29:38 GMT
> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/OFBiz%27s+Data+File+Tools
> >>>>> here is a good link for a lot of help
> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/FAQ+-+Tips+-+Tricks+-+Cookbook+-+HowTo
> >>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Handling+of+External+data
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Juan Pablo sent the following on 1/14/2010 8:42 AM:
> >>>>>> Hi Axel.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1)
> >>>>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/OFBiz+End+User+Docs+Home
> >>>>>>   http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBTECH/Home
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) http://ofbiz.markmail.org/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 8:30 AM, axel van noten <[hidden email]>wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I've been installing OFBiz and looking for the following information:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1) Where is the primary point can I find the most update documentation?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The documentation buton on the OFBiz website and the help button in the
> >>>>>>> application are both bringing me to the cwiki.apache site. But there seems
> >>>>>>> to be no clear structure nor a primary point where I can turn to for manuals
> >>>>>>> and documentation.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2) is there a possibility to perform a text search on this mailing list?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 3) I'm trying to load a product database into OFBiz. What would be the
> >>>>>>> appropriate way to do so? Is this documented somewhere?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks for your help!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Kind regards
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Axel
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
> >>>>>>> Keep your friends updated�even when you�re not signed in.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_5:092010
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.
> >>>>> _________________________________________________________________
> >>>>> Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.
> >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/middleeast/windows/windowslive/see-it-in-action/social-network-basics.aspx?ocid=PID23461::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-xm:SI_SB_2:092009
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Warnock <[hidden email]>
> > RidgeCrest Herbals, Inc.
> >

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