Shark Integration

[cjhowe]

I've been continuing to look at Pentaho and it has
Shark integrated into it and I'm starting to see the
benefit that it may offer.  Over the past two years
I've sporadically seen posts about shark not being
fully implemented, etc.  Could someone answer these
two questions...

What exactly is encompassed by "fully implemented"?

How much of that is done and what remains?

[David E Jones-2]

The best person to address this is Andy as he has done most of the  
work on Shark to date.

The first thing that needs to be done is to update to the most recent  
version of Shark. The one Andy wrote against is not an official  
release and is a couple of years old.

Once that is done it needs to be tested and at least one PoC  
application of it done, perhaps replacing the old order authorization  
workflow that now runs on the OFBiz Workflow Engine.

The best way to see what exists and what doesn't is probably to just  
run it and play around...

-David


On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:33 PM, Chris Howe wrote:

> I've been continuing to look at Pentaho and it has
> Shark integrated into it and I'm starting to see the
> benefit that it may offer.  Over the past two years
> I've sporadically seen posts about shark not being
> fully implemented, etc.  Could someone answer these
> two questions...
>
> What exactly is encompassed by "fully implemented"?
>
> How much of that is done and what remains?

[Jacopo Cappellato]

I think that another task we should consider is removing the
dependencies to the old "workflow" component; I've noticed that there
are some fields in the WorkEffort entity that are related to the
workflow component and there is also some java classes (in the order and
workeffort components) that use workflow's classes.

In general, it would be nice for the new Shark integration (but I don't
know if possible) to avoid this kind of dependencies and make the work
flow engine an optional/external/pluggable tool.

Jacopo

David E Jones wrote:

>
> The best person to address this is Andy as he has done most of the work
> on Shark to date.
>
> The first thing that needs to be done is to update to the most recent
> version of Shark. The one Andy wrote against is not an official release
> and is a couple of years old.
>
> Once that is done it needs to be tested and at least one PoC application
> of it done, perhaps replacing the old order authorization workflow that
> now runs on the OFBiz Workflow Engine.
>
> The best way to see what exists and what doesn't is probably to just run
> it and play around...
>
> -David
>
>
> On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:33 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
>
>> I've been continuing to look at Pentaho and it has
>> Shark integrated into it and I'm starting to see the
>> benefit that it may offer.  Over the past two years
>> I've sporadically seen posts about shark not being
>> fully implemented, etc.  Could someone answer these
>> two questions...
>>
>> What exactly is encompassed by "fully implemented"?
>>
>> How much of that is done and what remains?

[cjhowe]

regarding dependencies.  While Pentaho doesn't have
the same database manipulation tools that OFBiz has,
they don't attempt to mix the shark database with
theirs.  Would this be a better approach (to leave
shark outside of OFBiz's data model)?

--- Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think that another task we should consider is
> removing the
> dependencies to the old "workflow" component; I've
> noticed that there
> are some fields in the WorkEffort entity that are
> related to the
> workflow component and there is also some java
> classes (in the order and
> workeffort components) that use workflow's classes.
>
> In general, it would be nice for the new Shark
> integration (but I don't
> know if possible) to avoid this kind of dependencies
> and make the work
> flow engine an optional/external/pluggable tool.
>
> Jacopo
>
> David E Jones wrote:
> >
> > The best person to address this is Andy as he has
> done most of the work
> > on Shark to date.
> >
> > The first thing that needs to be done is to update
> to the most recent
> > version of Shark. The one Andy wrote against is
> not an official release
> > and is a couple of years old.
> >
> > Once that is done it needs to be tested and at
> least one PoC application
> > of it done, perhaps replacing the old order
> authorization workflow that
> > now runs on the OFBiz Workflow Engine.
> >
> > The best way to see what exists and what doesn't
> is probably to just run
> > it and play around...
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> > On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:33 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
> >
> >> I've been continuing to look at Pentaho and it
> has
> >> Shark integrated into it and I'm starting to see
> the
> >> benefit that it may offer.  Over the past two
> years
> >> I've sporadically seen posts about shark not
> being
> >> fully implemented, etc.  Could someone answer
> these
> >> two questions...
> >>
> >> What exactly is encompassed by "fully
> implemented"?
> >>
> >> How much of that is done and what remains?
>
>

[David E Jones-2]

Right now the Shark data model is mostly separate from the OFBiz data  
model, though it is run in the same database for convenience.

-David


On Nov 5, 2006, at 2:08 AM, Chris Howe wrote:

> regarding dependencies.  While Pentaho doesn't have
> the same database manipulation tools that OFBiz has,
> they don't attempt to mix the shark database with
> theirs.  Would this be a better approach (to leave
> shark outside of OFBiz's data model)?
>
> --- Jacopo Cappellato <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I think that another task we should consider is
>> removing the
>> dependencies to the old "workflow" component; I've
>> noticed that there
>> are some fields in the WorkEffort entity that are
>> related to the
>> workflow component and there is also some java
>> classes (in the order and
>> workeffort components) that use workflow's classes.
>>
>> In general, it would be nice for the new Shark
>> integration (but I don't
>> know if possible) to avoid this kind of dependencies
>> and make the work
>> flow engine an optional/external/pluggable tool.
>>
>> Jacopo
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> The best person to address this is Andy as he has
>> done most of the work
>>> on Shark to date.
>>>
>>> The first thing that needs to be done is to update
>> to the most recent
>>> version of Shark. The one Andy wrote against is
>> not an official release
>>> and is a couple of years old.
>>>
>>> Once that is done it needs to be tested and at
>> least one PoC application
>>> of it done, perhaps replacing the old order
>> authorization workflow that
>>> now runs on the OFBiz Workflow Engine.
>>>
>>> The best way to see what exists and what doesn't
>> is probably to just run
>>> it and play around...
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:33 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've been continuing to look at Pentaho and it
>> has
>>>> Shark integrated into it and I'm starting to see
>> the
>>>> benefit that it may offer.  Over the past two
>> years
>>>> I've sporadically seen posts about shark not
>> being
>>>> fully implemented, etc.  Could someone answer
>> these
>>>> two questions...
>>>>
>>>> What exactly is encompassed by "fully
>> implemented"?
>>>>
>>>> How much of that is done and what remains?
>>
>>
>