Re: The future of OFBiz

[Christian Carlow-OFBizzer]

I've only been with the project for about a year, but agree activity
seems to have be faded recently. There are a lot of unresolved JIRA
issues reported by me that I haven't had time to reevaluate.

Based on a previous posts by contributors such as Adrian Crum about lack
of potential innovation within the community and posts about other
projects such as Moqui, I assume members are exploring other options or
getting discouraged.  Others credited some of the lack of participation
to the projects maturity.  It was also mentioned that OFBiz might last
another 10-15 years and then be replaced by something like Moqui.

I would like to see this project have more activity and am also happy to
discuss its future.

On 03/05/2014 10:04 AM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Hi
>
> I am newer to Ofbiz then everybody else on the list so can only
> comment on what has happened recently(1.5 years), in my short
> experience it feels like there are a few committers actively working
> with Ofbiz and the others don't seem to be adding any real value.
>
> I guess it depends what the community want from Ofbiz, do we want a
> complete ERP system that looks good and has most of the functionality
> of the commercial products or it is more of a framework which requires
> quite a bit of coding to get it working(just my experience may not be
> everyone's). I would rather the first option, we have had to persuade
> quite a few senior manager and director in our business that Ofbiz is
> the right solutions because out the box as it looks old fashioned and
> doesn't have all the features a medium sized company requires.
>
> I am happy to discuss further as we have banked on Ofbiz being around
> for a while and would want to be involved in shaping its future.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> *Simon Maskell *
>
> *Service Delivery Manager*
>
> *Stannah Management Services Ltd*
>
> *IT Department*
>
> *Ext:*
>
>
>
> 7056
>
> *DDI:*
>
>
>
> 01264 341256
>
> *Fax:*
>
>
>
> 01264 341264
>
>
>
>
>
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:  Rupert Howell <[hidden email]>
> To:  Paul Piper <[hidden email]>,
> Cc:  Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>, Simon Maskell
> <[hidden email]>, Nick Rosser <[hidden email]>, Imac
> <[hidden email]>, [hidden email],
> [hidden email], Andrew Hemp <[hidden email]>
> Date:  05/03/2014 15:08
> Subject:    Re: The future of OFBiz
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Hi
>
> Yes I agree with you both, the project feels stagnant and it feels
> like an 'Old Boys' club at times with features and paradigm changes
> for personal gain being included and prioritised ahead of much needed
> work that would benefit the community. There have been a few cases of
> this recently and they basically came down to one thing - the
> committers and contributors must also support themselves financially -
> so what they are working on for private business becomes a priority
> for them.
>
> I, like Paul, have grievances with the project but also see the
> benefits that have kept me working with it for such a long period of
> time. Changing the status quo is a tricky thing to do and would take
> alot of time and alot of resource (and therefore money) - as OFBiz is
> perpetually suffering from the lack of these I am definitely
> interested to hear any ideas you may have for the present, but also
> for the future - as in a year's time the committers and contributors
> will still have to support themselves financially.
>
> I've worked with Jacques before on private contracts and know that he
> will often put community gain ahead of financial so I'm definitely
> keen to hear his opinion.  Pierre, I'm guessing to have sent this mail
> out - and to the subset of the mailing list you have sent it to - you
> have an embryonic idea/plan of the way you would like to steer this
> and I am keen to hear that also. I'd also have some suggestions that I
> would class as critical for the project to survive that I could air.
>
> I have added my colleague Andrew Hemp to the list of CCs.
>
> All the best.
>
> Rupert
>
>
> On 5 March 2014 14:06, Paul Piper <[e-mail]_
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> Hi Pierre,
>
> I share your belief that the current set-up is not beneficial to the
> community. I fear that many of the current problems (few committers,
> slow progress, missing release-plan, focus on specific technologies
> [minilang]) derive on the setup and are blocking progress of an
> otherwise great project and hence I am all in favor of meeting up for
> a conference call.
>
> I would like to include Jacques to our discussion, however. I think he
> has a long-term, non-financial interest in the community and it would
> be beneficial to hear his perspective as well. Especially, since I
> dont see this as a move against specific members, but against a
> status-quo.
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>
> *Von:* Pierre Smits [mailto:[e-mail]_
> <mailto:[hidden email]>] *
> Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 5. März 2014 14:23*
> An:* Simon Maskell; Rupert Howell; Nick Rosser; Paul Piper; Imac;
> [e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>;
> [hidden email].uk_ <mailto:[hidden email]>*
> Betreff:* The future of OFBiz
>
> Hi All,
>
> How do you feel the project is going? Does it feel to you, like it
> does to me, that is getting a bit stale...
>
> The list of unresolved issues is growing, even when with patches and
> the activity of PMC members and committers seem to be diminishing. And
> innovation, both community and code wise seems to be stalling.
>
> Having been part of the OFBiz community for over 5 years now I see the
> decline (like others do) and something needs to be done. This project
> should be a healthy one with an active influx of new contributors
> (every question raised and every answer given also qualifies) year on
> year. And with it effects on the group of committers and PMC.
>
> The list of PMC members currently contains 13 names (see _here_
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Apache+OFBiz+PMC+%28Project+Management+Committee%29+Members+and+Committers>),
> of which some have never been active at all in this project (2 -
> probably the initial sponsors when the project was in incubation) and
> several others seem to have withdrawn from the project (although still
> stated otherwise in earlier mentioned list). This list hasn't changed
> much over the lifespan of the project. PMC members seem to think that
> it is a lifetime tenure.
>
> In fact, currently only 5 are somewhat active and of those 5 active
> members 3 are of the same company (hotwax). Given that the 5 PMC
> members are also the 5 active committers it seems that working in the
> interest of the project (which as the ASF states should be 'community
> over code') isn't happening that much any more. Only 1 is actively
> involved in participating in the community. And the others seem to be
> committed to achieve their own agenda in stead of being committed to
> the project.
>
> All this is against the wishes of the Apache Foundation.
>
> Nonetheless, the reports the PMC chair sends in every quarter (see
> _here_
> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Reports>)
> doesn't express these concerns. In stead it states that although there
> is decline everything is ok. But no thanks to them I would say.
>
> Do you feel the same? Unfortunately, given that we all are dispersed
> all over the planet meeting and discuss this and other aspects of the
> project is not an option.
>
> Would an OFBiz open discussion via a teleconference to discus the
> Future of the project and get to know the other participating in the
> project be an option for you?
>
> If so, please reply (and state the issues you believe should be
> discussed), and - if there is enough interest - I will set things up
> and communicate through the OFBiz ML.
>
> PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual issues
> expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant
> discussion...
>
> Regards,
>
> Met vriendelijke groet,
>
> *Pierre Smits*
>
> mob. _+31 6 432 45 169_ <tel:%2B31%206%20432%2045%20169>
>
> Skype: pierresmits_somonar
>
> *ORRTIZ: BMS*
>
> Services & Solutions for
>
> Cloud-Based Manufacturing,
>
> Professional Services and Retail & Trade
>
> *_www.orrtiz.com_* <http://www.orrtiz.com/>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Rupert Howell
>
> Provolve Ltd
> Front Office, Deale House, 16 Lavant Street, Petersfield, GU32 3EW, UK
>
> t: 01730 267868 / m: 079 0968 5308
> e: [e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>
> w: _http://www.provolve.com_ <http://www.provolve.com/>
>
>
> This email is intended only for the above addressee. It may contain
> privileged information. If you are not the addressee you must not
> copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it. If you
> have received it in error, please delete it and notify the sender.
>
> Stannah Lift Holdings Ltd registered No. 686996, Stannah Management
> Services Ltd registered No. 2483693, Stannah Lift Services Ltd
> registered No. 1189799, Stannah Microlifts Ltd registered No. 964804,
> Stannah Lifts Ltd registered No. 1189836, Stannah Stairlifts Ltd
> registered No. 1401451.
>
> All registered offices at Watt Close, East Portway, Andover,
> Hampshire, SP10 3SD, England.
>
> All Registered in England and Wales.
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Mmm, where does this discussion come from? I was unable to track it in my own email repository, nor in Markmail or Nabble. Ha I see now, it was
previously under the hood. Is there a reason it's now public?

Anyway now that's public, let's try to comment. First let's stick to facts, reading from bottom to top, here is my opinion, on behalf of nobody but
myself...

PMC members point
After a private discussion with Paul (and maybe Pierre but less focused) last week, I updated the PMC page. I even refined those last days, to show
that there are actually only 11 "active" committers in the PMC. We could get further on this by looking at the amount of commits for each committer,
but I think we should not be so picky, it's not worth it. Even if the situation is not that bad, we have indeed bigger fishes to fry.

@Paul,
Pierre initially stated
 >>>PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual issues expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant discussion...
I know it's not your opinion, but please let minilang apart ;)

I appreciate Rupert's comment, because it's quite realistic and pragmatic. We can always rant about OFBiz, and its driving team; but what can we do
else? So guys, do you have plans? Elaborate ones?

What do you want to do know? I must be clear at this stage: I'm not for any kind of fork! It might look discouraging seen from outside, but I know
very well why I want to continue to work on the "Apache OFBiz" project. The maintained infrastructure (technical, legal, etc.) we benefit at the ASF
is not the only element, but is certainly not the least.

This said, I have also rants to express. I must agree that even if we have currently still 11 "active" committers, the reality is much more sparse. At
this point, I began to write an ad hominem complaint, but when I think about, it's obvious it's not the tight way. Though, aat some point we will need
to slice the meat, I fear...

But we need to have a solid plan. Else persons like Adrian might follow the same way than David did. Adrian already expressed it, and that would not
be beneficial for the OFBiz project, at all... So we get back to Ruper's comment, it's all about means, manpower mostly...

Maybe we could first expose the issues we see and what we can do about them, one by one. But we should stay focused on feasibility, else again it will
be only words. So it's rather a matter of prioritisation in the real!

Looking forward to all inspiring comments (in other words, please no rants)

Jacques


Le 05/03/2014 18:00, Christian Carlow a écrit :

> I've only been with the project for about a year, but agree activity seems to have be faded recently. There are a lot of unresolved JIRA issues
> reported by me that I haven't had time to reevaluate.
>
> Based on a previous posts by contributors such as Adrian Crum about lack of potential innovation within the community and posts about other projects
> such as Moqui, I assume members are exploring other options or getting discouraged.  Others credited some of the lack of participation to the
> projects maturity.  It was also mentioned that OFBiz might last another 10-15 years and then be replaced by something like Moqui.
>
> I would like to see this project have more activity and am also happy to discuss its future.
>
> On 03/05/2014 10:04 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I am newer to Ofbiz then everybody else on the list so can only comment on what has happened recently(1.5 years), in my short experience it feels
>> like there are a few committers actively working with Ofbiz and the others don't seem to be adding any real value.
>>
>> I guess it depends what the community want from Ofbiz, do we want a complete ERP system that looks good and has most of the functionality of the
>> commercial products or it is more of a framework which requires quite a bit of coding to get it working(just my experience may not be everyone's).
>> I would rather the first option, we have had to persuade quite a few senior manager and director in our business that Ofbiz is the right solutions
>> because out the box as it looks old fashioned and doesn't have all the features a medium sized company requires.
>>
>> I am happy to discuss further as we have banked on Ofbiz being around for a while and would want to be involved in shaping its future.
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>>
>> *Simon Maskell *
>>
>> *Service Delivery Manager*
>>
>> *Stannah Management Services Ltd*
>>
>> *IT Department*
>>
>> *Ext:*
>>
>>
>>
>> 7056
>>
>> *DDI:*
>>
>>
>>
>> 01264 341256
>>
>> *Fax:*
>>
>>
>>
>> 01264 341264
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:  Rupert Howell <[hidden email]>
>> To:  Paul Piper <[hidden email]>,
>> Cc:  Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>, Simon Maskell <[hidden email]>, Nick Rosser <[hidden email]>, Imac
>> <[hidden email]>, [hidden email], [hidden email], Andrew Hemp <[hidden email]>
>> Date:  05/03/2014 15:08
>> Subject:    Re: The future of OFBiz
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Yes I agree with you both, the project feels stagnant and it feels like an 'Old Boys' club at times with features and paradigm changes for personal
>> gain being included and prioritised ahead of much needed work that would benefit the community. There have been a few cases of this recently and
>> they basically came down to one thing - the committers and contributors must also support themselves financially - so what they are working on for
>> private business becomes a priority for them.
>>
>> I, like Paul, have grievances with the project but also see the benefits that have kept me working with it for such a long period of time. Changing
>> the status quo is a tricky thing to do and would take alot of time and alot of resource (and therefore money) - as OFBiz is perpetually suffering
>> from the lack of these I am definitely interested to hear any ideas you may have for the present, but also for the future - as in a year's time the
>> committers and contributors will still have to support themselves financially.
>>
>> I've worked with Jacques before on private contracts and know that he will often put community gain ahead of financial so I'm definitely keen to
>> hear his opinion.  Pierre, I'm guessing to have sent this mail out - and to the subset of the mailing list you have sent it to - you have an
>> embryonic idea/plan of the way you would like to steer this and I am keen to hear that also. I'd also have some suggestions that I would class as
>> critical for the project to survive that I could air.
>>
>> I have added my colleague Andrew Hemp to the list of CCs.
>>
>> All the best.
>>
>> Rupert
>>
>>
>> On 5 March 2014 14:06, Paul Piper <[e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>> Hi Pierre,
>>
>> I share your belief that the current set-up is not beneficial to the community. I fear that many of the current problems (few committers, slow
>> progress, missing release-plan, focus on specific technologies [minilang]) derive on the setup and are blocking progress of an otherwise great
>> project and hence I am all in favor of meeting up for a conference call.
>>
>> I would like to include Jacques to our discussion, however. I think he has a long-term, non-financial interest in the community and it would be
>> beneficial to hear his perspective as well. Especially, since I dont see this as a move against specific members, but against a status-quo.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Paul
>>
>> *Von:* Pierre Smits [mailto:[e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>] *
>> Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 5. März 2014 14:23*
>> An:* Simon Maskell; Rupert Howell; Nick Rosser; Paul Piper; Imac; [e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>;
>> [hidden email].uk_ <mailto:[hidden email]>*
>> Betreff:* The future of OFBiz
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> How do you feel the project is going? Does it feel to you, like it does to me, that is getting a bit stale...
>>
>> The list of unresolved issues is growing, even when with patches and the activity of PMC members and committers seem to be diminishing. And
>> innovation, both community and code wise seems to be stalling.
>>
>> Having been part of the OFBiz community for over 5 years now I see the decline (like others do) and something needs to be done. This project should
>> be a healthy one with an active influx of new contributors (every question raised and every answer given also qualifies) year on year. And with it
>> effects on the group of committers and PMC.
>>
>> The list of PMC members currently contains 13 names (see _here_
>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Apache+OFBiz+PMC+%28Project+Management+Committee%29+Members+and+Committers>), of which some
>> have never been active at all in this project (2 - probably the initial sponsors when the project was in incubation) and several others seem to
>> have withdrawn from the project (although still stated otherwise in earlier mentioned list). This list hasn't changed much over the lifespan of the
>> project. PMC members seem to think that it is a lifetime tenure.
>>
>> In fact, currently only 5 are somewhat active and of those 5 active members 3 are of the same company (hotwax). Given that the 5 PMC members are
>> also the 5 active committers it seems that working in the interest of the project (which as the ASF states should be 'community over code') isn't
>> happening that much any more. Only 1 is actively involved in participating in the community. And the others seem to be committed to achieve their
>> own agenda in stead of being committed to the project.
>>
>> All this is against the wishes of the Apache Foundation.
>>
>> Nonetheless, the reports the PMC chair sends in every quarter (see _here_ <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Reports>)
>> doesn't express these concerns. In stead it states that although there is decline everything is ok. But no thanks to them I would say.
>>
>> Do you feel the same? Unfortunately, given that we all are dispersed all over the planet meeting and discuss this and other aspects of the project
>> is not an option.
>>
>> Would an OFBiz open discussion via a teleconference to discus the Future of the project and get to know the other participating in the project be
>> an option for you?
>>
>> If so, please reply (and state the issues you believe should be discussed), and - if there is enough interest - I will set things up and
>> communicate through the OFBiz ML.
>>
>> PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual issues expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant discussion...
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>
>> *Pierre Smits*
>>
>> mob. _+31 6 432 45 169_ <tel:%2B31%206%20432%2045%20169>
>>
>> Skype: pierresmits_somonar
>>
>> *ORRTIZ: BMS*
>>
>> Services & Solutions for
>>
>> Cloud-Based Manufacturing,
>>
>> Professional Services and Retail & Trade
>>
>> *_www.orrtiz.com_* <http://www.orrtiz.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Rupert Howell
>>
>> Provolve Ltd
>> Front Office, Deale House, 16 Lavant Street, Petersfield, GU32 3EW, UK
>>
>> t: 01730 267868 / m: 079 0968 5308
>> e: [e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>
>> w: _http://www.provolve.com_ <http://www.provolve.com/>
>>
>>
>> This email is intended only for the above addressee. It may contain privileged information. If you are not the addressee you must not copy,
>> distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it. If you have received it in error, please delete it and notify the sender.
>>
>> Stannah Lift Holdings Ltd registered No. 686996, Stannah Management Services Ltd registered No. 2483693, Stannah Lift Services Ltd registered No.
>> 1189799, Stannah Microlifts Ltd registered No. 964804, Stannah Lifts Ltd registered No. 1189836, Stannah Stairlifts Ltd registered No. 1401451.
>>
>> All registered offices at Watt Close, East Portway, Andover, Hampshire, SP10 3SD, England.
>>
>> All Registered in England and Wales.
>>
>
>

[Christian Carlow-OFBizzer]

Eh, my fault, I replied to ML which opened the hood.

On 03/05/2014 01:25 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> Mmm, where does this discussion come from? I was unable to track it in
> my own email repository, nor in Markmail or Nabble. Ha I see now, it
> was previously under the hood. Is there a reason it's now public?
>
> Anyway now that's public, let's try to comment. First let's stick to
> facts, reading from bottom to top, here is my opinion, on behalf of
> nobody but myself...
>
> PMC members point
> After a private discussion with Paul (and maybe Pierre but less
> focused) last week, I updated the PMC page. I even refined those last
> days, to show that there are actually only 11 "active" committers in
> the PMC. We could get further on this by looking at the amount of
> commits for each committer, but I think we should not be so picky,
> it's not worth it. Even if the situation is not that bad, we have
> indeed bigger fishes to fry.
>
> @Paul,
> Pierre initially stated
> >>>PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual
> issues expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant
> discussion...
> I know it's not your opinion, but please let minilang apart ;)
>
> I appreciate Rupert's comment, because it's quite realistic and
> pragmatic. We can always rant about OFBiz, and its driving team; but
> what can we do else? So guys, do you have plans? Elaborate ones?
>
> What do you want to do know? I must be clear at this stage: I'm not
> for any kind of fork! It might look discouraging seen from outside,
> but I know very well why I want to continue to work on the "Apache
> OFBiz" project. The maintained infrastructure (technical, legal, etc.)
> we benefit at the ASF is not the only element, but is certainly not
> the least.
>
> This said, I have also rants to express. I must agree that even if we
> have currently still 11 "active" committers, the reality is much more
> sparse. At this point, I began to write an ad hominem complaint, but
> when I think about, it's obvious it's not the tight way. Though, aat
> some point we will need to slice the meat, I fear...
>
> But we need to have a solid plan. Else persons like Adrian might
> follow the same way than David did. Adrian already expressed it, and
> that would not be beneficial for the OFBiz project, at all... So we
> get back to Ruper's comment, it's all about means, manpower mostly...
>
> Maybe we could first expose the issues we see and what we can do about
> them, one by one. But we should stay focused on feasibility, else
> again it will be only words. So it's rather a matter of prioritisation
> in the real!
>
> Looking forward to all inspiring comments (in other words, please no
> rants)
>
> Jacques
>
>
> Le 05/03/2014 18:00, Christian Carlow a écrit :
>> I've only been with the project for about a year, but agree activity
>> seems to have be faded recently. There are a lot of unresolved JIRA
>> issues reported by me that I haven't had time to reevaluate.
>>
>> Based on a previous posts by contributors such as Adrian Crum about
>> lack of potential innovation within the community and posts about
>> other projects such as Moqui, I assume members are exploring other
>> options or getting discouraged.  Others credited some of the lack of
>> participation to the projects maturity.  It was also mentioned that
>> OFBiz might last another 10-15 years and then be replaced by
>> something like Moqui.
>>
>> I would like to see this project have more activity and am also happy
>> to discuss its future.
>>
>> On 03/05/2014 10:04 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I am newer to Ofbiz then everybody else on the list so can only
>>> comment on what has happened recently(1.5 years), in my short
>>> experience it feels like there are a few committers actively working
>>> with Ofbiz and the others don't seem to be adding any real value.
>>>
>>> I guess it depends what the community want from Ofbiz, do we want a
>>> complete ERP system that looks good and has most of the
>>> functionality of the commercial products or it is more of a
>>> framework which requires quite a bit of coding to get it
>>> working(just my experience may not be everyone's). I would rather
>>> the first option, we have had to persuade quite a few senior manager
>>> and director in our business that Ofbiz is the right solutions
>>> because out the box as it looks old fashioned and doesn't have all
>>> the features a medium sized company requires.
>>>
>>> I am happy to discuss further as we have banked on Ofbiz being
>>> around for a while and would want to be involved in shaping its future.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Simon Maskell *
>>>
>>> *Service Delivery Manager*
>>>
>>> *Stannah Management Services Ltd*
>>>
>>> *IT Department*
>>>
>>> *Ext:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7056
>>>
>>> *DDI:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 01264 341256
>>>
>>> *Fax:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 01264 341264
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From:  Rupert Howell <[hidden email]>
>>> To:  Paul Piper <[hidden email]>,
>>> Cc:  Pierre Smits <[hidden email]>, Simon Maskell
>>> <[hidden email]>, Nick Rosser <[hidden email]>,
>>> Imac <[hidden email]>, [hidden email],
>>> [hidden email], Andrew Hemp <[hidden email]>
>>> Date:  05/03/2014 15:08
>>> Subject:    Re: The future of OFBiz
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Yes I agree with you both, the project feels stagnant and it feels
>>> like an 'Old Boys' club at times with features and paradigm changes
>>> for personal gain being included and prioritised ahead of much
>>> needed work that would benefit the community. There have been a few
>>> cases of this recently and they basically came down to one thing -
>>> the committers and contributors must also support themselves
>>> financially - so what they are working on for private business
>>> becomes a priority for them.
>>>
>>> I, like Paul, have grievances with the project but also see the
>>> benefits that have kept me working with it for such a long period of
>>> time. Changing the status quo is a tricky thing to do and would take
>>> alot of time and alot of resource (and therefore money) - as OFBiz
>>> is perpetually suffering from the lack of these I am definitely
>>> interested to hear any ideas you may have for the present, but also
>>> for the future - as in a year's time the committers and contributors
>>> will still have to support themselves financially.
>>>
>>> I've worked with Jacques before on private contracts and know that
>>> he will often put community gain ahead of financial so I'm
>>> definitely keen to hear his opinion.  Pierre, I'm guessing to have
>>> sent this mail out - and to the subset of the mailing list you have
>>> sent it to - you have an embryonic idea/plan of the way you would
>>> like to steer this and I am keen to hear that also. I'd also have
>>> some suggestions that I would class as critical for the project to
>>> survive that I could air.
>>>
>>> I have added my colleague Andrew Hemp to the list of CCs.
>>>
>>> All the best.
>>>
>>> Rupert
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5 March 2014 14:06, Paul Piper <[e-mail]_
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>> Hi Pierre,
>>>
>>> I share your belief that the current set-up is not beneficial to the
>>> community. I fear that many of the current problems (few committers,
>>> slow progress, missing release-plan, focus on specific technologies
>>> [minilang]) derive on the setup and are blocking progress of an
>>> otherwise great project and hence I am all in favor of meeting up
>>> for a conference call.
>>>
>>> I would like to include Jacques to our discussion, however. I think
>>> he has a long-term, non-financial interest in the community and it
>>> would be beneficial to hear his perspective as well. Especially,
>>> since I dont see this as a move against specific members, but
>>> against a status-quo.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> *Von:* Pierre Smits [mailto:[e-mail]_
>>> <mailto:[hidden email]>] *
>>> Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 5. März 2014 14:23*
>>> An:* Simon Maskell; Rupert Howell; Nick Rosser; Paul Piper; Imac;
>>> [e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>;
>>> [hidden email].uk_ <mailto:[hidden email]>*
>>> Betreff:* The future of OFBiz
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> How do you feel the project is going? Does it feel to you, like it
>>> does to me, that is getting a bit stale...
>>>
>>> The list of unresolved issues is growing, even when with patches and
>>> the activity of PMC members and committers seem to be diminishing.
>>> And innovation, both community and code wise seems to be stalling.
>>>
>>> Having been part of the OFBiz community for over 5 years now I see
>>> the decline (like others do) and something needs to be done. This
>>> project should be a healthy one with an active influx of new
>>> contributors (every question raised and every answer given also
>>> qualifies) year on year. And with it effects on the group of
>>> committers and PMC.
>>>
>>> The list of PMC members currently contains 13 names (see _here_
>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Apache+OFBiz+PMC+%28Project+Management+Committee%29+Members+and+Committers>),
>>> of which some have never been active at all in this project (2 -
>>> probably the initial sponsors when the project was in incubation)
>>> and several others seem to have withdrawn from the project (although
>>> still stated otherwise in earlier mentioned list). This list hasn't
>>> changed much over the lifespan of the project. PMC members seem to
>>> think that it is a lifetime tenure.
>>>
>>> In fact, currently only 5 are somewhat active and of those 5 active
>>> members 3 are of the same company (hotwax). Given that the 5 PMC
>>> members are also the 5 active committers it seems that working in
>>> the interest of the project (which as the ASF states should be
>>> 'community over code') isn't happening that much any more. Only 1 is
>>> actively involved in participating in the community. And the others
>>> seem to be committed to achieve their own agenda in stead of being
>>> committed to the project.
>>>
>>> All this is against the wishes of the Apache Foundation.
>>>
>>> Nonetheless, the reports the PMC chair sends in every quarter (see
>>> _here_
>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Reports>)
>>> doesn't express these concerns. In stead it states that although
>>> there is decline everything is ok. But no thanks to them I would say.
>>>
>>> Do you feel the same? Unfortunately, given that we all are dispersed
>>> all over the planet meeting and discuss this and other aspects of
>>> the project is not an option.
>>>
>>> Would an OFBiz open discussion via a teleconference to discus the
>>> Future of the project and get to know the other participating in the
>>> project be an option for you?
>>>
>>> If so, please reply (and state the issues you believe should be
>>> discussed), and - if there is enough interest - I will set things up
>>> and communicate through the OFBiz ML.
>>>
>>> PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual
>>> issues expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant
>>> discussion...
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>> *Pierre Smits*
>>>
>>> mob. _+31 6 432 45 169_ <tel:%2B31%206%20432%2045%20169>
>>>
>>> Skype: pierresmits_somonar
>>>
>>> *ORRTIZ: BMS*
>>>
>>> Services & Solutions for
>>>
>>> Cloud-Based Manufacturing,
>>>
>>> Professional Services and Retail & Trade
>>>
>>> *_www.orrtiz.com_* <http://www.orrtiz.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rupert Howell
>>>
>>> Provolve Ltd
>>> Front Office, Deale House, 16 Lavant Street, Petersfield, GU32 3EW, UK
>>>
>>> t: 01730 267868 / m: 079 0968 5308
>>> e: [e-mail]_ <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>> w: _http://www.provolve.com_ <http://www.provolve.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>> This email is intended only for the above addressee. It may contain
>>> privileged information. If you are not the addressee you must not
>>> copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it. If
>>> you have received it in error, please delete it and notify the sender.
>>>
>>> Stannah Lift Holdings Ltd registered No. 686996, Stannah Management
>>> Services Ltd registered No. 2483693, Stannah Lift Services Ltd
>>> registered No. 1189799, Stannah Microlifts Ltd registered No.
>>> 964804, Stannah Lifts Ltd registered No. 1189836, Stannah Stairlifts
>>> Ltd registered No. 1401451.
>>>
>>> All registered offices at Watt Close, East Portway, Andover,
>>> Hampshire, SP10 3SD, England.
>>>
>>> All Registered in England and Wales.
>>>
>>
>>