Re: Users - IDE was Updated documentation ...

[BJ Freeman]

I don't believe there are any libraries from eclipse that are included
in ofbiz.
Eclipse uses the JavaC that comes with the SDK
now 1.4.2_01 had a memory leak. but 1.4.2_11 does not.


Vinay Agarwal sent the following on 3/29/06 4:16 PM:

> Visual Studio is an example and only that. It obviously won't work for OFBiz
> because it doesn't do Java. Out of Java IDEs, IntelliJ is the highest rated
> although I have not worked on it. Personally I have found NetBeans 5 to be
> better than Eclipse for two reasons--Eclipse seems to leak memory on my
> Windows XP and NetBeans has much better code assistance.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
> On Behalf Of BJ Freeman
> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:59 PM
> To: OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion
> Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - Updated documentation ...
>
> I spent years with visual studio.
> first I don't like Ms making my job more difficult by adding their
> version of everything into what I want todo.
>
> Second it make it more difficult of work with the world at large the gcc
> and gcc+
>
> Third the last thing I want to do is be tied to windows.
>
> I prefer something like Eclipse where you can have the code to the IDE
> an it uses the complier that started before windows. It supports all
> languages, so there is no integration.
>
>
> Vinay Agarwal sent the following on 3/29/06 3:46 PM:
>
>>I believe we should focus on developing tools (customized IDE) as much as
>>documentation. Even if perfect documentation were to be available for
>
> OFBiz,
>
>>a newbie would still have a very long ramp up time since
>>1. Documentation for something as complex as OFBiz won't be small.
>>2. The number of technologies need to be understood are a lot (Java,
>>minilang, xml, html, javascript, widgets, ftl, ant etc). One has to know
>>sufficiently about them in order to read the code and make even minor
>
> mods.
>
>>The best example I have seen an IDE alleviate need for a lot of reading is
>>Visual Studio which does a good job of making skeleton code for commonly
>>used but complex tasks. NetBeans 5 has a very basic "code writing"
>>capability for pure Java. And I understand that IntelliJ IDEA has some
>>built-in capabilities for some popular frameworks. If we can get an IDE to
>>build skeleton file/function structure for commonly used items, it would
>
> go
>
>>a long way to speed up newbies and may even increase efficiency of
>
> experts.
>
>>Regards,
>>Vinay Agarwal
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>On Behalf Of Adrian Crum
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 11:12 AM
>>To: OFBiz Users / Usage Discussion
>>Subject: Re: [OFBiz] Users - Updated documentation ...
>>
>>I like this idea BJ, but online help only works after the installation is
>>running. It's good to mention this though, because it would be nice to
>
> have
>
>>an
>>online help system reference the "official" documentation (in whatever
>
> form
>
>>it
>>becomes) once the installation is running.
>>
>>Take the database questions that come up frequently as an example. On the
>>mailing list, users are referred to the Webtools page, Wiki, past
>
> mailings,
>
>>etc.
>>Let's say that information is collected and distilled into the OFBiz
>>documentation. If someone is setting up a new installation and OFBiz won't
>>start
>>because of DB issues, then an online help system won't be of much use.
>
> They
>
>>will
>>have to access the documentation in some other way. Once the system is up
>>and
>>running, clicking on Help from the Webtools page would take them to the
>
> same
>
>>DB
>>documentation they referenced earlier.
>>
>>
>>BJ Freeman wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>David I agree with the site you have, even as a commercial venture.
>>>However I believe there should be division between the code that
>>>supports the site and the data in the site.
>>>
>>>I ask about a help framework earlier, that this would answer. However it
>>>is not to duplicate your data, but to put user specific help based on my
>>>modification. I doubt my help files would be an any interest, unless my
>>>mods are being used.
>>>
>>>Now if you feel that part of the cost could be re-coupled for the code
>>>segment, then I believe that should be separate from the actual support
>>>site you maintain.
>>>
>>>Maybe the Code could be such that all but the localize help would go to
>>>your site.
>>>
>>>Just some thoughts.
>>>
>>>David E. Jones sent the following on 3/29/06 10:29 AM:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>This does bring up an interesting discussion point: how should we manage
>>
>>end-user oriented documentation (and other documentation too...)?
>>
>>
>>>>Notice that I did _not_ ask what would everyone like to see in the
>>
>>documentation... that is a moot point without a way to go about getting it
>>in place. I'd rather not talk about that as it has been discussed quite a
>>bit, it confuses the point of how to get things done and who will do them,
>>and often leads to blaming those who have contributed to OFBiz for not
>>contributing even more.
>>
>>
>>>>The eventual form of the documentation is another problem, made more
>>
>>difficult by the fact that depending on how you look at it there are
>
> either
>
>>many targets or one moving target to go after...
>>
>>
>>>>The Undersun documentation site is something Andy and I started pushing a
>>
>>while back and is built (mostly by Al Byers) on the OFBiz content
>
> component.
>
>>The actual content (images and text) are maintained and mostly written by
>>Les who is a technical writer we are contracting with to maintain it.
>>
>>
>>>>This is commercial rather than collaborative in nature because
>>
>>collaborative attempts in the past at OFBiz documentation have failed so
>>completely that nothing has been written except isolated pockets of
>>documentation (including the "official" documentation on the ofbiz.org
>
> site)
>
>>that we not only don't get many (or any) contributions, but we almost
>
> never
>
>>even get feedback on the documentation.
>>
>>
>>>>I think this is largely by the nature of documentation. When most people
>>
>>say they want "documentation" what they really want is understanding of
>
> the
>
>>software either technical or business and end user level. The hope of
>>documentation is to get people to those points of understanding as quickly
>>as possible, but initially even seeing the size of the documentation and
>
> the
>
>>options available can be a serious "gumption trap". For a great discussion
>>on gumption traps I recommend the book "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
>>Maintenance" by Robert Pirsig.
>>
>>
>>>>Anyway, back the real issue...
>>>>
>>>>My hope with the Undersun site is that it would become more
>
> collaborative.
>
>>Those who are interested in contributing have been given free accounts to
>>the site. We have a nearly full-time technical writer on contract to help
>>maintain the information so that it can hopefully remain more consistent
>
> and
>
>>better controlled.
>>
>>
>>>>If people object to the commercial nature of it, ie we charge for access
>>
>>to the site on a subscription basis, then that's fine. If there are other
>>alternative it would be great. So far the site is not profitable, not even
>>close to profitable. In fact, Andy and I subsidize the site pretty heavily
>>in hopes that someday it will pay for itself, and in the mean time we
>>believe it is important to the success of OFBiz to have end-user oriented
>>documentation, and so we continue to invest what little we can in it.
>>
>>
>>>>I would appreciate any feedback anyone might have. In general it would
>>
>>also be great to see more invested in this and other documentation efforts
>>as it is one of a few areas of OFBiz that could use some work.
>>
>>
>>>>-David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ian Gilbert wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm glad they are popular :)  I am happy to release these under any
>>
>>license but I'm not sure that
>>
>>
>>>>>this will have the desired effect.  My reasoning is that the development
>>
>>community (that this doc
>>
>>
>>>>>is not really targeted at) has a range of resources to pull information
>>
>>from (wiki, production
>>
>>
>>>>>guide, mailing lists, intro docs on the Open Source Strategies site, the
>>
>>Undersun Consulting docs
>>
>>
>>>>>etc.,) but most of my users are non tech and would simply get lost in
>
> the
>
>>information.  Indeed
>>
>>
>>>>>they would not even consider contributing back and probably would have
>>
>>difficulties understanding
>>
>>
>>>>>the concept.  Certainly there would be hurdles to stop them (I cannot
>
> see
>
>>them using Jira for
>>
>>
>>>>>example although I can see them deluging me with the same emails a few
>>
>>hundred times).  There is
>>
>>
>>>>>not too much user orientated resource available at the moment but this
>
> is
>
>>understandable because
>>
>>
>>>>>the type of business user who has got involved in the project so far
>
> have
>
>>all had a considerable
>>
>>
>>>>>technical ability and inclination.
>>>>>
>>>>>We have quite a high turnover of people at ES and so it made a lot of
>>
>>sense to write some form of
>>
>>
>>>>>training or user reference doc simply to reduce the amount of time that
>
> I
>
>>was spending with people
>>
>>
>>>>>on the same questions.  I think that there is still lots to do on this
>>
>>(similar books run to 5-600
>>
>>
>>>>>pages in the shops so I'm not going to stop now ;) Granted I've skipped
>>
>>the traditional
>>
>>
>>>>>'Introduction to the Internet' which most of them have (don't worry guys
>>
>>- it will be in the next
>>
>>
>>>>>version) but even so there is a huge amount still to cover even with the
>>
>>limited way in which we
>>
>>
>>>>>use Ofbiz.  I was also keen to create a doc that could be pulled apart
>>
>>and used as a test script
>>
>>
>>>>>as much of the UAT we do is much easier that way.
>>>>>
>>>>>The reason I don't think it will work in the community in the same way
>
> is
>
>>that there are very few
>>
>>
>>>>>end users (or appear to be) on the list that wouldn't be better off
>>
>>updating the wiki.  I've used
>>
>>
>>>>>Open Office to create the DocBook format (it was the first of these that
>>
>>I've done and I do like
>>
>>
>>>>>it but would like to use another editor to create new tags which I think
>>
>>might end up with a more
>>
>>
>>>>>flexible document (i.e. use one document root to create sub docs for
>>
>>Administrators, store clerks,
>>
>>
>>>>>accounts team etc., which should be quite straightforward with xml) but
>
> I
>
>>have to fit this into
>>
>>
>>>>>gaps between contracts like the one I've got right now.
>>>>>
>>>>>That said I'm happy for this to be released under any license and for
>>
>>anyone to use this in any
>>
>>
>>>>>way they see fit.  Considering the value that ES and I have had from
>>
>>participating in this project
>>
>>
>>>>>it really is the least I can do.  At some point I would like to write a
>>
>>more professional guide
>>
>>
>>>>>and ideally have it published properly.  I think that this would be
>>
>>better created with a number
>>
>>
>>>>>of authors simply because the subject is so big.
>>>>>
>>>>>Very best wishes
>>>>>
>>>>>Ian
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, March 29, 2006 12:28, David Welton wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Yes, nice job indeed.  It would be good to see something like this
>>>>>>>>distributed with OFBiz itself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes, or maybe a link from official OFBiz site (Doc tab) will be
>>
>>sufficient ?
>>
>>
>>>>>>As the years go by, stuff that doesn't get held together tends to
>>>>>>float apart (bit rot).  Perhaps if the DocBook sources were in
>>
>>Subversion, more people would update
>>
>>
>>>>>>them and add to them, as well. However, this is a decision for Ian, who
>>
>>would have to release the
>>
>>
>>>>>>docs under a suitable license, and the developers, who would have to
>>
>>choose to include it.
>>
>>
>>>>>>--
>>>>>>David N. Welton
>>>>>>- http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Linux, Open Source Consulting
>>>>>>- http://www.dedasys.com/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>Users mailing list
>>>>>>[hidden email]
>>>>>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Users mailing list
>>>>[hidden email]
>>>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Users mailing list
>>>[hidden email]
>>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Users mailing list
>>[hidden email]
>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Users mailing list
>>[hidden email]
>>http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users