The future of OFBiz - Open Discussion

[Pierre Smits]

Hi All,

It would be better to discuss the necessity and/or merits of each (JIRA)
issue in the issue itself, in stead of making generalizing assertions. It
would keep focus and would show that collaboration takes place to resolve
issues in this project.

Regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

[Mike Bates-2]

Paul: you say you have nothing against HWM and you understand OFBiz history, but your comments consistently reflect your negative bias toward HWM as a company. You imply that we are somehow conspiring against individuals who otherwise have merit on their side, but are foiled by HWM employees within the OFBiz community through some kind of organized effort.

If you look more closely, you will see that a. HWM team members are highly effective at banding together to get things done in OFBiz (with 10,000+ hours donated, we have a lot of practice cooperating on this) and b. when it comes to open source project governance, HWM employees experience no bias or other "direction" from the company either way. Rather, these folks operate totally on their own as individuals within the community.

If you want to get things done in the OFBiz project, bring your best ideas and enlist others in the community. If your ideas are good, no doubt the community will encourage you, and some of those supporting you will be from HWM. Just because you share an idea, however, does not mean it is a good idea idea that (anyone in) the community will agree with, much less take up and pursue.

In the mean time, feel free to stop imagining that "HWM" is somehow conspiring against you. Believe me, we're not. The fact is that we wish you the best and would love to see you help improve OFBiz through great design, stellar project management, ingenious code, or whatever other aspect may be appropriate for you as an individual.

Best regards,

Mike

On Mar 18, 2014, at 2:55 AM, Paul Piper <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I reread the flow of this email exchange and I feel obliged to point out a
> few things:
>
>
> @Scott:
> 1) "I won't be attending simply because it is organized by Pierre [...]"
>
>> I think that is a mistake. If any member of the community feels strongly
>> enough to rattle the cages, the pmc should hear him out or alternatively
>> ask him to publish the results on the ml so that the community can share
>> the outcome. I can see how this is an understandable reaction, but I still
>> think it may not be advisable to go harshly against those who are
>> apparently interested in the project.
>
> 2) "When I joined this project there was very little infighting and
> contributing was a rewarding experience that earned you respect and praise
> from your peers."
>
>> I am interested to hear how, from your experience, this changed. You can
>> rest assured that I have deep respect for your contributions (or for
>> anybody who is participating in this community for this matter). Perhaps
>> you are sharing my belief that commitment is not rewarding at this moment?
>
> 3) "For those of you who have an opinion but aren't actually doing anything
> tangible (commit reviews, patch reviews, ticket research, contributing
> designs and documentation)"
>
>> I think you are pointing directly towards the types of contribution the
>> PMC values. As pointed out before, I think this is only half the truth. By
>> reducing the involvement on code alone, I fear that you are taking away
>> the team spirit. Any team effort on larger project requires good
>> architects, good project managers, good requirement managers and quality
>> managers right next to developers. By focusing only on code, you are
>> pretty much taking the value out of the other contributions.
>
>
> @ Jacopo
> 1) "I would like to mention that Pierre is the only one person in the
> history of the project that sent his remarks against the OFBiz PMC to the
> Board of the Apache Software Foundation, asking them to step-in and act
> versus the OFBiz PMC: he actually did it twice (2 years ago and again
> yesterday)."
>
>> I can see that this is difficult not to take personally, but isn't that
>> why the board of the ASF exists? If he feels misunderstood or neglected by
>> the PMC, perhaps we should ask why and try to reason with him
>> accordingly?!
>
>
> 2)"I completely disagree that the problem is that the PMC/committers group
> is not noticing contributors; the problem is instead that the current
> admission bar that we have set, is probably too high for this community."
>
>> With a single sentence you pretty much vented your own frustration while
>> simultaneously taking away other contributions. As Jacques also pointed
>> out there is a long list of contributors who haven't received any merit
>> despite their years of effort: Ruth, BJ, Rupert, etc. are all examples of
>> this behavior and it is this that I think is breaking the community
>> spirit. Some of them have left the community for these reasons by now,
>> btw.
>
> 3) "As regards your specific position, since this seems to be your main
> concern/complain, please see below: " ... "Here is the whole list of commits
> in which you have some credit (over a few years):"
>
>> Here again you focus on a single piece of contribution: code. That is
>> probably only your own view on things, but I must say that I find it
>> rather astounding. I would also like to point out that in no way I
>> inferred that "this seems to be my main concern/complain". I can only
>> speak for myself when I complain about problems in the community and so I
>> did. Not only did you fail to see the point I was raising, you also turned
>> it into a personal insult. I think this explains a lot on what is
>> currently going on in the community.
>
> 4) “This is a completely different topic that doesn't affect in any way our
> decisions about new committers.”
>> Actually it couldn’t be further from the truth. I currently have the
>> impression that the PMC is run like a boys club, where those connected to
>> the HWM are getting more likely to become a part of. I would like to point
>> out that the list of people I mentioned who haven’t been active in this
>> community in years, or perhaps only slightly for a short while, is also a
>> list dominated by former or current HWM employees.
> Again, I am not trying to offend those who have actually gained their merit
> through actual commitment, but with the list of people I mentioned there is
> at least some doubt. I also have nothing against HWM and I understand OFBiz’
> history, but precisely because of it the PMC has to make sure it isn’t seen
> as overrun by a single company.
>
> @David
> 1) "This is an inspiring reminder of how things actually work in the ASF.
> Apache OFBiz is not managed top-down, it is managed bottom-up based on
> actual effort and merit. "
>
> If this were the case, then the discussion would go differently. It is
> definately a top-down management approach. I have no problem with it, but we
> should accept that this is the way it is: you gain merit through action and
> hence climb up the ladder.
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/The-future-of-OFBiz-Open-Discussion-tp4648865p4649395.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

[Paul Piper]

Hi Mike,

I am not biased against HWM, but what I question is the objectivity that is currently used within this project. As an open source software, you would assume that this project is run by the community - as often claimed by anybody within the PMC. If you look at the current list of members and there personal relations, I would argue that there is at least a conflicting perspective:


PMC Members with HWM background
* Jacopo Cappellato (V.P. Technology - Hotwax Media)
* Scott Gray (Developer - Hotwax Media)
* Bilgin Ibryam (Former Hotwax Developer)
* David E. Jones (Former CTO Hotwax Media)
* Anil Patel (COO Hotwax Media)
* Ashish Vijaywargiya (Vice President of Operations at HotWax Media)
* Andrew Zeneski (former CIO Hotwax Media)

---
Other PMC members
* Adrian Crum
* Hans Bakker
* Jacques le Roux
* Erwan de Ferrieres
* Adam Heath
* David Welton

If you focus on those that are currently active, you cannot argue that the PMC isn't overrun by HWM employees. Now to be very precise on this: I don't think that this by itself is a problem. It does, however, put you on the spot and makes it less obvious that there is a community focus in place. Does this mean that I question every decision by the PMC? No, I think they are mostly doing a fine job, but it does mean that the community has to be careful, just to make sure that community interest are not neglected in favor of company interests.

Active movements against large commits, as in OFBIZ-5312 or presented before, don't really help to "clear" the air in this case and neither does protectionism of software fragments that aren't used much outside HWM.

[Paul Piper]

I made one error in my list: Bilgin Ibryam

I meant Marco Risaliti, but I forgot that he was not part of the PMC, but a Committer instead.

[Anil Patel-3]

Paul
Many thanks for writing so much about HotWax. OFBiz Community would benefit lot more if you instead put all this energy to study OFBIz. It will make your contribution useful to others.


Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
COO
Hotwax Media Inc
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
ApacheCon US 2013 Gold Sponsor
http://na.apachecon.com/sponsors/
Sent from my iPad

> On Mar 18, 2014, at 12:30 PM, Paul Piper <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> I am not biased against HWM, but what I question is the objectivity that is
> currently used within this project. As an open source software, you would
> assume that this project is run by the community - as often claimed by
> anybody within the PMC. If you look at the current list of members and there
> personal relations, I would argue that there is at least a conflicting
> perspective:
>
>
> PMC Members with HWM background
> * Jacopo Cappellato (V.P. Technology - Hotwax Media)
> * Scott Gray (Developer - Hotwax Media)
> * Bilgin Ibryam (Former Hotwax Developer)
> * David E. Jones (Former CTO Hotwax Media)
> * Anil Patel (COO Hotwax Media)
> * Ashish Vijaywargiya (Vice President of Operations at HotWax Media)
> * Andrew Zeneski (former CIO Hotwax Media)
>
> ---
> Other PMC members
> * Adrian Crum
> * Hans Bakker
> * Jacques le Roux
> * Erwan de Ferrieres
> * Adam Heath
> * David Welton
>
> If you focus on those that are currently active, you cannot argue that the
> PMC isn't overrun by HWM employees. Now to be very precise on this: I don't
> think that this by itself is a problem. It does, however, put you on the
> spot and makes it less obvious that there is a community focus in place.
> Does this mean that I question every decision by the PMC? No, I think they
> are mostly doing a fine job, but it does mean that the community has to be
> careful, just to make sure that community interest are not neglected in
> favor of company interests.
>
> Active movements against large commits, as in OFBIZ-5312 or presented
> before, don't really help to "clear" the air in this case and neither does
> protectionism of software fragments that aren't used much outside HWM.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/The-future-of-OFBiz-Open-Discussion-tp4648865p4649425.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

[Pierre Smits]

I find the reply of Anil contemptible and uncalled for. Such a posting does
not help in building the community and furthering the project. In stead it
is a sure path of alienating others.

Regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

[Jacques Le Roux]

I agree with you Pierre, but please consider to add at least a sentence on what you are replying to.

The reason is some persons use Nabble instead of directly the ML. And sometimes it takes few minutes for Nabble to sync with the ML, so it might be
confusing.

Thanks

Jacques

Le 18/03/2014 14:04, Pierre Smits a écrit :

> Hi All,
>
> It would be better to discuss the necessity and/or merits of each (JIRA)
> issue in the issue itself, in stead of making generalizing assertions. It
> would keep focus and would show that collaboration takes place to resolve
> issues in this project.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>

[Anil Patel-3]

Jacques,
What do you mean when you say you agree with Pierre?


Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
COO
Hotwax Media Inc
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
ApacheCon US 2013 Gold Sponsor
http://na.apachecon.com/sponsors/

On Mar 18, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree with you Pierre, but please consider to add at least a sentence on what you are replying to.
>
> The reason is some persons use Nabble instead of directly the ML. And sometimes it takes few minutes for Nabble to sync with the ML, so it might be confusing.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 18/03/2014 14:04, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>> Hi All,
>>
>> It would be better to discuss the necessity and/or merits of each (JIRA)
>> issue in the issue itself, in stead of making generalizing assertions. It
>> would keep focus and would show that collaboration takes place to resolve
>> issues in this project.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pierre Smits
>>
>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> Services and Retail & Trade
>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Anil,

Simply that we should put/keep comments in Jira issues when they are related. This for history sake, I think I wrote that maybe a dozen times already.

Jacques

Le 18/03/2014 19:38, Anil Patel a écrit :

> Jacques,
> What do you mean when you say you agree with Pierre?
>
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Anil Patel
> COO
> Hotwax Media Inc
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
> ApacheCon US 2013 Gold Sponsor
> http://na.apachecon.com/sponsors/
>
> On Mar 18, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I agree with you Pierre, but please consider to add at least a sentence on what you are replying to.
>>
>> The reason is some persons use Nabble instead of directly the ML. And sometimes it takes few minutes for Nabble to sync with the ML, so it might be confusing.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 18/03/2014 14:04, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> It would be better to discuss the necessity and/or merits of each (JIRA)
>>> issue in the issue itself, in stead of making generalizing assertions. It
>>> would keep focus and would show that collaboration takes place to resolve
>>> issues in this project.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Pierre Smits
>>>
>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>
>

[Anil Patel-3]

Jacques,
Thanks for clarification.

I have put my comments on Jira. My email on this email thread is my response to Paul’s big email about Hotwax Media.

Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
COO
Hotwax Media Inc
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
ApacheCon US 2013 Gold Sponsor
http://na.apachecon.com/sponsors/

On Mar 18, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Anil,
>
> Simply that we should put/keep comments in Jira issues when they are related. This for history sake, I think I wrote that maybe a dozen times already.
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 18/03/2014 19:38, Anil Patel a écrit :
>> Jacques,
>> What do you mean when you say you agree with Pierre?
>>
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> COO
>> Hotwax Media Inc
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
>> ApacheCon US 2013 Gold Sponsor
>> http://na.apachecon.com/sponsors/
>>
>> On Mar 18, 2014, at 2:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with you Pierre, but please consider to add at least a sentence on what you are replying to.
>>>
>>> The reason is some persons use Nabble instead of directly the ML. And sometimes it takes few minutes for Nabble to sync with the ML, so it might be confusing.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> Le 18/03/2014 14:04, Pierre Smits a écrit :
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> It would be better to discuss the necessity and/or merits of each (JIRA)
>>>> issue in the issue itself, in stead of making generalizing assertions. It
>>>> would keep focus and would show that collaboration takes place to resolve
>>>> issues in this project.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>
>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>
>>

[Ean Schuessler]

----- "Paul Piper" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am not biased against HWM, but what I question is the objectivity
> that is
> currently used within this project. As an open source software, you
> would
> assume that this project is run by the community - as often claimed
> by
> anybody within the PMC. If you look at the current list of members and
> there
> personal relations, I would argue that there is at least a
> conflicting
> perspective:
>
>
> PMC Members with HWM background
> * Jacopo Cappellato (V.P. Technology - Hotwax Media)
> * Scott Gray (Developer - Hotwax Media)
> * Bilgin Ibryam (Former Hotwax Developer)
> * David E. Jones (Former CTO Hotwax Media)
> * Anil Patel (COO Hotwax Media)
> * Ashish Vijaywargiya (Vice President of Operations at HotWax Media)
> * Andrew Zeneski (former CIO Hotwax Media)
>
> ---
> Other PMC members
> * Adrian Crum
> * Hans Bakker
> * Jacques le Roux
> * Erwan de Ferrieres
> * Adam Heath
> * David Welton

I suppose the conspiracy at work here is the same flavor of conspiracy
that dominates the development of the GCC compiler or the Linux kernel.
One might look at these efforts and conclude that there is a conspiracy
on Red Hat's part to control these software systems. It is true that
Red Hat has conspired to create a vast organization with influence in
many corners of the globe, however, I believe that a more suitable label
for this "conspiracy" is "commercial success".

A protracted discussion about why the most visibly successful implementer
of the project's software holds "unfair" sway doesn't strike me as
productive. If you want to change that, go back to building your business
and hire more firepower than they have. All of us will benefit.

As David Jones readily demonstrates, if you have new ideas you can
always write new code. Moqui is a more powerful statement than anything you
can say on a conference call.

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO
[hidden email]
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com

[Mike Bates-2]

Paul,

I understand your concerns, and I’m sorry you feel that you are somehow excluded based on anything other than merit. That must be a frustrating feeling.

The fact is, there is no history of HWM affiliation increasing the likelihood of PMC membership. Indeed 4 of the 6 individuals you mentioned were PMC members prior to their affiliation with HWM, and a 5th was at least a committer prior to his affiliation with HWM. Hopefully that will help you accept that the PMC is indeed merit-driven, and has been formed and maintained in accordance with the relevant ASF policies.

At HotWax Media we will continue to do our best to make sure that OFBiz is a healthy project with a supportive community. We don't always do that perfectly, of course, but we try. In that spirit, I'll bow out of this conversation with you now Paul, because I don't see any more value in it. You are on the wrong path, and I don't want to encourage you any more than I already have. Here's hoping you will focus your energy on something other than the HotWax Conspiracy going forward.

If we can find a productive way to collaborate on improving OFBiz, let's do it!

Best regards,

Mike

--
Mike Bates
HotWax Media
CEO
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
main: 877.736.4080
ApacheCon US 2013 Gold Sponsor
http://na.apachecon.com/sponsors

On Mar 18, 2014, at 10:28 AM, Paul Piper <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> I am not biased against HWM, but what I question is the objectivity that is
> currently used within this project. As an open source software, you would
> assume that this project is run by the community - as often claimed by
> anybody within the PMC. If you look at the current list of members and there
> personal relations, I would argue that there is at least a conflicting
> perspective:
>
>
> PMC Members with HWM background
> * Jacopo Cappellato (V.P. Technology - Hotwax Media)
> * Scott Gray (Developer - Hotwax Media)
> * Bilgin Ibryam (Former Hotwax Developer)
> * David E. Jones (Former CTO Hotwax Media)
> * Anil Patel (COO Hotwax Media)
> * Ashish Vijaywargiya (Vice President of Operations at HotWax Media)
> * Andrew Zeneski (former CIO Hotwax Media)
>
> ---
> Other PMC members
> * Adrian Crum
> * Hans Bakker
> * Jacques le Roux
> * Erwan de Ferrieres
> * Adam Heath
> * David Welton
>
> If you focus on those that are currently active, you cannot argue that the
> PMC isn't overrun by HWM employees. Now to be very precise on this: I don't
> think that this by itself is a problem. It does, however, put you on the
> spot and makes it less obvious that there is a community focus in place.
> Does this mean that I question every decision by the PMC? No, I think they
> are mostly doing a fine job, but it does mean that the community has to be
> careful, just to make sure that community interest are not neglected in
> favor of company interests.
>
> Active movements against large commits, as in OFBIZ-5312 or presented
> before, don't really help to "clear" the air in this case and neither does
> protectionism of software fragments that aren't used much outside HWM.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/The-future-of-OFBiz-Open-Discussion-tp4648865p4649425.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

[David E. Jones-2]

Thank you for putting this in perspective Ean.

To all:

Indeed the reason so many prominent OFBiz developers were part of Hotwax is that the whole point of the company growth at the time many of us joined was to bring together some of the best talent independent in the community (ie that were interested and in a situation that made sense to join). Hotwax came along in its current form after OFBiz became part of the ASF, and any issues that might have come from bringing these people into one commercial organization can be laid at my feet.

That structure has worked great in some ways and not so great in others. For me personally there were some not so great things and that's why I'm not a part of the company any more. The great things outweigh that in terms of commercial success, and that's why it still exists. That commercial success brings substantial benefits to OFBiz itself. The talent in that organization is why even to this day I still recommend that various clients hire Hotwax Media to get good stuff done. I may not be involved with the group any more, but it's still a great group and I can't even express in words how much the people in this group have benefitted and continue to benefit OFBiz and all who use it and are involved with the community.

If you want an accurate current roster of PMC members who are part of Hotwax it is Jacopo, Scott, Anil, and Ashish. Andrew and I haven't been a part of the group for years, including a couple of years after leaving Hotwax and remaining active in OFBiz.

That doesn't really matter though, what would matter are decisions by the PMC that seem to favor Hotwax. I challenge anyone to name one. Committers are invited based on code contributions. PMC members are typically invited based on continued code contributions, community involvement, and initiative on the project.

Even that doesn't really matter so much. What matters is the path forward. Like Ean said if anyone wants to build commercial success by all means do so. The success of others in no way blocks your own success. The OFBiz market is pretty big, and the open source ERP market is SO much larger than all of us together could service that there really is no way even everyone with any sort of experience with OFBiz could cover it all. In nearly every contract I work on we have the challenge of finding good OFBiz developers and end up training people. Over the years I have personally trained nearly 1000 people on OFBiz development, and while that has decreased for me over the last 3 years the number for those years is still around 100. It is true that many of these people worked on a particular project and then never did OFBiz work again, and never got involved in the community, but they are still out there and the point is that it's a big market place.

As has been said so many times in this and related threads:

1. if you want to become a committer start contributing code, and do so in a way that makes it easy for committers to get it in place... and also work on more than just your own contributions, help review and test and comment on contributions from others

2. if you want to become a PMC member, start out with #1, continue with everything in that over time, and get involved even more generally with the community including discussions, Jira contribution reviews and commits, and showing initiative to push along different parts of the project

Like it or not the PMC is made up of the people currently on it, and they are the ones who decide who will be committers and other PMC members. That is the organization setup by the ASF, and is in fact very similar to the pattern used by OFBiz even before the project joined the ASF.

This is the governance pattern for OFBiz and for the ASF in general. It's not likely to substantially change any time soon. Either work with it or do something else. Either way merit is merit, and ultimately it all comes down to code and how one interacts with others to produce and refine code. All of this motive assumption and political BS is just that, bullshit.

The only reason that I'm participating in this discussion in spite of my current minimal involvement with OFBiz is that this is a path to nothing good. Paul, Pierre, and others pushing this: please try to understand the ASF processes better and work within them, including working well with others already established on the project, and don't be surprised if trying to work around it doesn't produce the desired result. Also realize that this sort of discussion has come up many times before, it's nothing new. I know that well having been the PMC Chair for a number of years and having participated in many similar discussions.

If you can't get along with others, or if you are not finding what you're looking for in the OFBiz community, for goodness sake go do your own thing. That's exactly what I did with Moqui/Mantle/etc because I am interested in working on became more difficult to do within the OFBiz software and community. That doesn't mean OFBiz or its governance model is bad in any way, just not what I was personally looking for. Consider that I made that decision even in the position some seem to with they had and are complaining loudly in some seeming sort of hope to get into without going through the years of effort required in the established governance model. It leaves me wondering what the hell certain people are trying to do. I don't get it. I asked in some of my other recent posts and still see no answer, and still don't get what the goal of all of this is or how in any way something good might come of it.

Maybe starting with an explanation of one's own motive might be more effective that straw-man attacks against the motives of others...

-David



On Mar 18, 2014, at 4:03 PM, Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ----- "Paul Piper" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I am not biased against HWM, but what I question is the objectivity
>> that is
>> currently used within this project. As an open source software, you
>> would
>> assume that this project is run by the community - as often claimed
>> by
>> anybody within the PMC. If you look at the current list of members and
>> there
>> personal relations, I would argue that there is at least a
>> conflicting
>> perspective:
>>
>>
>> PMC Members with HWM background
>> * Jacopo Cappellato (V.P. Technology - Hotwax Media)
>> * Scott Gray (Developer - Hotwax Media)
>> * Bilgin Ibryam (Former Hotwax Developer)
>> * David E. Jones (Former CTO Hotwax Media)
>> * Anil Patel (COO Hotwax Media)
>> * Ashish Vijaywargiya (Vice President of Operations at HotWax Media)
>> * Andrew Zeneski (former CIO Hotwax Media)
>>
>> ---
>> Other PMC members
>> * Adrian Crum
>> * Hans Bakker
>> * Jacques le Roux
>> * Erwan de Ferrieres
>> * Adam Heath
>> * David Welton
>
> I suppose the conspiracy at work here is the same flavor of conspiracy
> that dominates the development of the GCC compiler or the Linux kernel.
> One might look at these efforts and conclude that there is a conspiracy
> on Red Hat's part to control these software systems. It is true that
> Red Hat has conspired to create a vast organization with influence in
> many corners of the globe, however, I believe that a more suitable label
> for this "conspiracy" is "commercial success".
>
> A protracted discussion about why the most visibly successful implementer
> of the project's software holds "unfair" sway doesn't strike me as
> productive. If you want to change that, go back to building your business
> and hire more firepower than they have. All of us will benefit.
>
> As David Jones readily demonstrates, if you have new ideas you can
> always write new code. Moqui is a more powerful statement than anything you
> can say on a conference call.
>
> --
> Ean Schuessler, CTO
> [hidden email]
> 214-720-0700 x 315
> Brainfood, Inc.
> http://www.brainfood.com

[Pierre Smits]

To all,

Thank you all for contributing to this discussion.
I guess that, in light of the title of this thread, a lot must be said by
many to express their feelings about what they think is wrong in this
project.
Such as: PMC members feel that contributors don't do enough, that
contributors don't know what the principles of the ASF are, that
contributors don't know how the ASF works, that contributors don't follow
their (the PMC's) dictates/dogma/doctrine, that contributors do stuff that
they (the PMC members) are affronted by.
But also: contributors feel that the PMC does a bad job at recognizing
merit, that PMC members minimize their ( the contributors) contributions,
that PMC members don't engage that much anymore in collaboration with other
community members, that our VP is good at producing overviews of
interactions of certain contributors when he feels he must point out that
the contributor is bad for this project and to put these persons back in
the submissive role he believes they deserve, that our VP (and PMC) doesn't
do a good job at producing overviews of interactions between community
members in order to show that they do a good job at contributing to this
project.

And we all can go one and on pointing fingers where the other(s) is/are
wrong.
No matter what all of us pile on to that, it won't convince anybody that
everything is neat and dandy in this project (in other words this community
is collaborating in furthering the project by building the community and
improving/innovating its output). On the contrary.

If we accept that things are not good in this community, we can start
working on that. And we need to make that our prime objective (as the ASF
has in its principles: community over code), before we can get back to
collaborating in improving that other output of this project.

I welcome the suggestion made by David to have each of us explain our own
motive for participating in this project. So, what is your personal mission
statement with respect to your involvement in this project?
But I suggest to expand that with: what do you feel the responsibilities
are that come with the privileges of the roles in this project?

Because if we don't understand from each other how the other sees how his
own participation and his own responsibilities (in light of the role - and
its privileges - he has), how can we accept that and build from there...

Regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

[Paul Piper]

@David: You asked me about my personal motivation, so here it is:
I honestly believe that, even though OFBiz has a market at this moment, it isn’t growing at the pace it would need to sustain itself for a long while. That isn’t a problem of the software itself, the architecture is great and the quality is astounding. In order to keep up with competition it will have to go through various changes in the near future, however. For all this we would require a growing community with more active committers – the current state is, however, a declining one. With the current outset, I would give OFBiz 3-5 more years until either the community has decided to opt out of further commitment, or people have moved on to other frameworks entirely.  I love OFBiz, but it is this that I fear the most.
Underneath it all, I have learnt that the OFBiz community isn’t a particularly friendly one. This wouldn’t be a problem if the documentation was up to such a level that you wouldn’t rely on the community, but that is, unfortunately, not the case. Understandably, the problem goes full circle – it requires a strong community to either work with new members, or create the necessary documentation to get people started, but we have to begin somewhere.
That’s why I brought it up earlier in the message list. I am not aiming for further personal involvement or even as far as a PMC membership (I honestly wouldn’t even know if I had the time to commit to this). I do, however, fear that my original two points “Not enough recognition for contributors”, “static PMC members” are the real dangers here and thus far I haven’t received a single word back on this. With the experience on how such a harmless thread even went down – and how Pierre was also assaulted, I would unfortunately, argue that there lies some truth in what I said. I do encourage, or hope, however, that the PMC will eventually find ways to change some of their behavior (mainly: give structure and support, encourage participation).

How the PMC relies on HWM employees wasn’t even on my original list – just an added afterthought or possible explanation to its stagnating form.

[Pierre Smits]

Maybe it is superfluous to add, but better safe than sorry:

Re: I welcome the suggestion made by David to have each of us explain our
own motive for participating in this project. So, what is your personal
mission statement with respect to your involvement in this project?
But I suggest to expand that with: what do you feel the responsibilities
are that come with the privileges of the roles in this project?


Please do this in the light of forward looking, the future of OFBiz. What
everybody has done in the past stands and is persisted (and recognized) in
code, documentation, mailing lists, JIRA, viewsvn, etc.

Regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

[Ean Schuessler]

----- "Pierre Smits" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Re: I welcome the suggestion made by David to have each of us explain
> our own motive for participating in this project.

We use OFBiz because it is the most mature Free Software solution we
have found for dealing with "real" e-commerce that has inventory
and manufacturing needs. We no longer use OFBiz as a solution for the
presentation or content management layer because we feel its
capabilities in that space are outclassed by other solutions. We are
starting to do a lot more mobile and HTML5 based interfaces that
rely on OFBiz for handling the underlying business processes.

The combination of the license and capabilities are our motivations
for using the tool. We also have a lot of experience with the OFBiz
internal structure and are hesitant to start over.

Our current focus is on building solutions around the tool rather
than trying to innovate in the tool itself. The capabilities we
utilize in OFBiz are well established so we have not had to make
many general purpose modifications. We have also become much more
aggressive about "mashing up" the "best of breed" to achieve
solutions rather than trying to duplicate capabilities from scratch.

--
Ean Schuessler, CTO
[hidden email]
214-720-0700 x 315
Brainfood, Inc.
http://www.brainfood.com

[Jacques Le Roux]

The recent answers from Ean and Anil on how they use OFBiz w/o its UI made me thought.

The current project I'm just beginning to work on wants to go even further. The desire is to use OFBiz only as a service engine.
I guess the data model will have to be touched. But for sure the UI will be completely bypassed.

So, it seems this project is going in the same direction than Ean and Anil. Notably what Ean says in his 1st and last section below.

Most of us know now that OFBiz OOTB UI is more a demo/POC to show all OFBiz possibilities. Moreover this UI has not been build from initial
requirements but built steps by steps.
Mostly when contributions from providers's clients allowed it. So it lacks consistency and does not offer a good UX.

Nevertheless, as a long time committer and PMC member, I believe it's our duty to maintain this UI and the tools which allow to build it.
Because it has precisely the merit of showing to new comers what you can do whit OFBiz.
And yes there are new comers starting everyday (I monitor the Nabble forum subscriptions whose give an idea about that)

For instance, in OFBiz using the Flat Grey Theme allows to set an UI in Arab or Hebrew (RTL languages) on 2 clicks.
Also you can use it with a Japanese or Chinese UI. I'm not sure other open source ERPs allow the same...

So I believe we don't need to invest to modernise the UI using tools like Bootstrap, Backbone or what not.
The last effort we made to have all js using jQuery was enough in this direction IMO.

What we need 1st is to take into account the backlog of pending Jira issues with contributions. And I think Jacopo for his initiative!
Prune that and continue to strengthen OFBiz in the field of security (there are a still few pending Jiras at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1525)

Of course there are some parts which could be enhanced.
I believe most can be found at https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/New+Features+Roadmap+-+Living+Document
It's a good place to put new ideas if you have. BTW, maybe we miss handling permissions using Shiro there...

Now maybe I did not really answer the question about my motivation, but at least it's my current state of mind

Jacques


Le 21/03/2014 22:28, Ean Schuessler a écrit :

> ----- "Pierre Smits"<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> Re: I welcome the suggestion made by David to have each of us explain
>> our own motive for participating in this project.
> We use OFBiz because it is the most mature Free Software solution we
> have found for dealing with "real" e-commerce that has inventory
> and manufacturing needs. We no longer use OFBiz as a solution for the
> presentation or content management layer because we feel its
> capabilities in that space are outclassed by other solutions. We are
> starting to do a lot more mobile and HTML5 based interfaces that
> rely on OFBiz for handling the underlying business processes.
>
> The combination of the license and capabilities are our motivations
> for using the tool. We also have a lot of experience with the OFBiz
> internal structure and are hesitant to start over.
>
> Our current focus is on building solutions around the tool rather
> than trying to innovate in the tool itself. The capabilities we
> utilize in OFBiz are well established so we have not had to make
> many general purpose modifications. We have also become much more
> aggressive about "mashing up" the "best of breed" to achieve
> solutions rather than trying to duplicate capabilities from scratch.
>