first steps to framework independence! vote here!

[Chris Snow-3]

Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without
breaking anything!

This is a small but important step towards framework independence...

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505

Many thanks in advance,

Chris

[Scott Gray-2]

What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?

Regards
Scott

HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>
> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>
> Many thanks in advance,
>
> Chris

[Chris Snow-3]

Bruno's question:

"So could we please review the patch?
Does it make sense?"

If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?

Scott Gray wrote:

> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>
>  
>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>
>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>
>> Many thanks in advance,
>>
>> Chris
>>    
>
>  

[Adam Heath-2]

Christopher Snow wrote:
> Bruno's question:
>
> "So could we please review the patch?
> Does it make sense?"
>
> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?

See my comments in the issue.

[Scott Gray-2]

Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.

Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?

Thanks
Scott

HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com

On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Bruno's question:
>
> "So could we please review the patch?
> Does it make sense?"
>
> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>
> Scott Gray wrote:
>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>
>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>
>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>    
>>
>>  
>

[Chris Snow-3]

Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  
"help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends
on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.

By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone
framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing
component-load.xml

Scott Gray wrote:

> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>
> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>
> Thanks
> Scott
>
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>
>  
>> Bruno's question:
>>
>> "So could we please review the patch?
>> Does it make sense?"
>>
>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>
>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>    
>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>
>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>  
>>>      
>
>  

[Scott Gray-2]

I asked if you had looked at the patch because it cannot be committed as is since it will disable all components except for the framework ones and party + content.

The only piece that has a place in a framework only release is the framework, anything else will get constant push back because it was never the intention of such an effort.

I know you're in a hurry to get this effort moving but I really don't think it is going to move anywhere near as fast as you want it to.  The best thing I think you can do is to thoroughly document every individual framework -> application dependency so that a committer who finds the time to work on this will at least have a head start.  Most of the reason for these incorrect dependencies were that it was simply the easier path to follow (IMO) and correcting them will be fairly difficult and require a lot of committer time before anything can be committed.

Regards
Scott

On 26/02/2010, at 12:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>
> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>
> Scott Gray wrote:
>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>
>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Scott
>>
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Bruno's question:
>>>
>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>
>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>
>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>    
>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris
>>>>>          
>>>>      
>>
>>  
>

[Anil Patel-3]

I rather see it differently.
Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.

I think we should do
/framework, /baseapps, /applications

We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  

Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
HotWax Media Inc
Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"

On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>
> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>
> Scott Gray wrote:
>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>
>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Scott
>>
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Bruno's question:
>>>
>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>
>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>
>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>    
>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris
>>>>>          
>>>>      
>>
>>  
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-4]

I am against moving party in the framework; we can discuss if a portion of the content should be moved there.

Jacopo

On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Anil Patel wrote:

> I rather see it differently.
> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.
>
> I think we should do
> /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>
> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Anil Patel
> HotWax Media Inc
> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>
>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>>
>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>>
>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>>
>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>
>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>
>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>
>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Chris Snow-3]

Hi Anil,

I believe a standalone application development framework should have all
the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.

- persistence
- services
- presentation tier
- reporting
- help
- security management
- job scheduler
- audit trail

Cheers,

Chris

Anil Patel wrote:

> I rather see it differently.
> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.
>
> I think we should do
> /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>
> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Anil Patel
> HotWax Media Inc
> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>
>  
>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>>
>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>>
>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>    
>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>>
>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>
>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>
>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>
>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>            
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>  
>>>      
>
>  

[Chris Snow-3]

Me too, however with the current dependencies ,framework effectively
depends on applications anyway.

Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> I am against moving party in the framework; we can discuss if a portion of the content should be moved there.
>
> Jacopo
>
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Anil Patel wrote:
>
>  
>> I rather see it differently.
>> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.
>>
>> I think we should do
>> /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>>
>> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> HotWax Media Inc
>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>>>
>>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>>>
>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>      
>>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>>>
>>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>>
>>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>>
>>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>          
>>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>        
>
>  

[Anil Patel-3]

Chris,
I agree with your list except for help. Help system should be a plugin that can be added to system. Delivery of Help should be controlled by screen design.

Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
HotWax Media Inc
Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"

On Feb 26, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Hi Anil,
>
> I believe a standalone application development framework should have all the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.
>
> - persistence
> - services
> - presentation tier
> - reporting
> - help
> - security management
> - job scheduler
> - audit trail
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> Anil Patel wrote:
>> I rather see it differently.
>> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.
>>
>> I think we should do /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>>
>> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> HotWax Media Inc
>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>>>
>>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>>>
>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>>>
>>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>>
>>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>>
>>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                
>>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>                
>>>>      
>>
>>  
>

[Chris Snow-3]

Hi Anil,

I suppose you could argue that birt should be a plugin too? Not every
app needs reporting and birt does add a lot of overhead.

Cbeers,

Chris

Anil Patel wrote:

> Chris,
> I agree with your list except for help. Help system should be a plugin that can be added to system. Delivery of Help should be controlled by screen design.
>
> Thanks and Regards
> Anil Patel
> HotWax Media Inc
> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>
> On Feb 26, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>
>  
>> Hi Anil,
>>
>> I believe a standalone application development framework should have all the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.
>>
>> - persistence
>> - services
>> - presentation tier
>> - reporting
>> - help
>> - security management
>> - job scheduler
>> - audit trail
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Anil Patel wrote:
>>    
>>> I rather see it differently.
>>> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.
>>>
>>> I think we should do /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>>>
>>> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  
>>> Thanks and Regards
>>> Anil Patel
>>> HotWax Media Inc
>>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>      
>>>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>>>>
>>>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>>>>
>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>    
>>>>        
>>>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>            
>>>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>                
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>      
>>>>>          
>>>  
>>>      
>
>  

[Anil Patel-3]

In fact Yes, I think birt should not be in framework as well. But its ok, because a) because it does not really have any database dependency b) Its third party library integration so the code in Ofbiz framework will not change as much.
Ideally, Yes I will like it to be out of the framework :)

Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
HotWax Media Inc
Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"

On Feb 26, 2010, at 3:21 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> Hi Anil,
>
> I suppose you could argue that birt should be a plugin too? Not every app needs reporting and birt does add a lot of overhead.
>
> Cbeers,
>
> Chris
>
> Anil Patel wrote:
>> Chris,
>> I agree with your list except for help. Help system should be a plugin that can be added to system. Delivery of Help should be controlled by screen design.
>>
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> HotWax Media Inc
>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Hi Anil,
>>>
>>> I believe a standalone application development framework should have all the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.
>>>
>>> - persistence
>>> - services
>>> - presentation tier
>>> - reporting
>>> - help
>>> - security management
>>> - job scheduler
>>> - audit trail
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> Anil Patel wrote:
>>>    
>>>> I rather see it differently.
>>>> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of moving content and Party into framework.
>>>>
>>>> I think we should do /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>>>>
>>>> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.  Thanks and Regards
>>>> Anil Patel
>>>> HotWax Media Inc
>>>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>      
>>>>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend on some party components.
>>>>>
>>>>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just by changing component-load.xml
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to be committed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why you would like to see the party and content application components included in a framework only release?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                
>>>>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                            
>>>>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone - without breaking anything!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework independence...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>>                                    
>>>>>>>>                            
>>>>>>                
>>>>      
>>
>>  
>

[Adam Heath-2]

You haven't gone far enough.

Stop thinking about just what you want.  Or just what Bruno wants.  Or
 what the guy from Timbuktu wants.

Think about what we all want.

Namely, the ability to pick and choose the parts of ofbiz that we want
to make use of.

Arbitrary assignments of components into parts is the wrong approach.
 Add features to lower-level components that can be extended by
higher-level components.  Add dependency references between components
as required.

[Adam Heath-2]

Christopher Snow wrote:

> Hi Anil,
>
> I believe a standalone application development framework should have all
> the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.
>
> - persistence
> - services
> - presentation tier
> - reporting
> - help
> - security management
> - job scheduler
> - audit trail

This is you.

I want to just be able to have a cross-platform way to talk to
multiple databases.

Joe over there doesn't want any of the widget system, or minilang, but
the service engine is what he likes.  He has his own way of talking to
the database, so would prefer not to have the entity-engine tagging along.

[Ruth Hoffman-2]

Hi Chris:
If user management is included in the following, then I agree. I don't
think I've ever created an application that didn't have at least an
administrative user.

If not I'd add (basic) user management.

Ruth

Christopher Snow wrote:

> Hi Anil,
>
> I believe a standalone application development framework should have
> all the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.
>
> - persistence
> - services
> - presentation tier
> - reporting
> - help
> - security management
> - job scheduler
> - audit trail
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> Anil Patel wrote:
>> I rather see it differently.
>> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things
>> out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of
>> moving content and Party into framework.
>>
>> I think we should do /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>>
>> We can put all those core components that need data model in /baseapps.
>> Thanks and Regards
>> Anil Patel
>> HotWax Media Inc
>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My
>>> reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the
>>> framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend
>>> on some party components.
>>>
>>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a
>>> standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just
>>> by changing component-load.xml
>>>
>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to
>>>> be committed.
>>>>
>>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why
>>>> you would like to see the party and content application components
>>>> included in a framework only release?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>      
>>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>>
>>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>>
>>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>          
>>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>                
>>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone -
>>>>>>> without breaking anything!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework
>>>>>>> independence...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>                
>>>>  
>>>>      
>>
>>  
>
>

[BJ Freeman]

there is a ant build target
create-admin-user-login
do a ant -p


Ruth Hoffman sent the following on 2/26/2010 12:56 PM:

> Hi Chris:
> If user management is included in the following, then I agree. I don't
> think I've ever created an application that didn't have at least an
> administrative user.
>
> If not I'd add (basic) user management.
>
> Ruth
>
> Christopher Snow wrote:
>> Hi Anil,
>>
>> I believe a standalone application development framework should have
>> all the functionality a developer needs to create an application, i.e.
>>
>> - persistence
>> - services
>> - presentation tier
>> - reporting
>> - help
>> - security management
>> - job scheduler
>> - audit trail
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> Anil Patel wrote:
>>> I rather see it differently.
>>> Framework components should core ones that compare to similar things
>>> out there. I will rather have help move out of framework instead of
>>> moving content and Party into framework.
>>>
>>> I think we should do /framework, /baseapps, /applications
>>>
>>> We can put all those core components that need data model in
>>> /baseapps. Thanks and Regards
>>> Anil Patel
>>> HotWax Media Inc
>>> Find us on the web at www.hotwaxmedia.com or Google Keyword "ofbiz"
>>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2010, at 2:36 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>
>>>  
>>>> Yes, I have looked at the patch.  I am in favor of it.  My
>>>> reasoning:  "help" would be important functionality for the
>>>> framework.  Help depends on some content tables which in turn depend
>>>> on some party components.
>>>>
>>>> By moving entities in a similar hack, I have managed to get a
>>>> standalone framework running and switch back to the full ofbiz just
>>>> by changing component-load.xml
>>>>
>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>  
>>>>> Have you even looked at the patch?  It is certainly not intended to
>>>>> be committed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you in favor of the patch?  If so, could you please explain why
>>>>> you would like to see the party and content application components
>>>>> included in a framework only release?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:22 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  
>>>>>    
>>>>>> Bruno's question:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "So could we please review the patch?
>>>>>> Does it make sense?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there are no major objections, then I guess he will commit it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
>>>>>>          
>>>>>>> What exactly are you requesting that people vote on?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HotWax Media
>>>>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 26/02/2010, at 12:15 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>              
>>>>>>>> Bruno has a patch that will allow us to run ofbiz standalone -
>>>>>>>> without breaking anything!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a small but important step towards framework
>>>>>>>> independence...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3505
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris
>>>>>>>>                      
>>>>>>>                
>>>>>  
>>>>>      
>>>
>>>  
>>
>>
>

[Bruno Busco]

This is what I am also trying to do.
Just have the possibility to *remove* all the applications but party
and content from an OFBiz installation and have it working.
Please stop thinking about moving things in or out of the framework.

The framework, if you like how it is right now, can stay there but
please let us create the possibility to remove applications according
to their declared dependency tree.

-Bruno

2010/2/26 Adam Heath <[hidden email]>:

> You haven't gone far enough.
>
> Stop thinking about just what you want.  Or just what Bruno wants.  Or
>  what the guy from Timbuktu wants.
>
> Think about what we all want.
>
> Namely, the ability to pick and choose the parts of ofbiz that we want
> to make use of.
>
> Arbitrary assignments of components into parts is the wrong approach.
>  Add features to lower-level components that can be extended by
> higher-level components.  Add dependency references between components
> as required.
>

[Adam Heath-2]

Bruno Busco wrote:
> This is what I am also trying to do.
> Just have the possibility to *remove* all the applications but party
> and content from an OFBiz installation and have it working.
> Please stop thinking about moving things in or out of the framework.
>
> The framework, if you like how it is right now, can stay there but
> please let us create the possibility to remove applications according
> to their declared dependency tree.

Here are more details to how I'd like to see this done.

==
./startofbiz.sh run
./startofbiz.sh tests
./startofbiz.sh install
==

Instead of having hard-coded properties files in the start component,
which then reference hard-coded foo-containers.xml, each component
that is installed should be allowed to 'register' what it would like
each run-target to do.

This would make switching between catalina and jetty simple, by just
swapping the components, with no editting of anything else.

It would make writing an asterisk component simpler, as it has it's
own container that has to be run, but modifying the global configs is
difficult.

It would allow for adding new startup targets, ones that ofbiz hasn't
thought of yet(would allow for some types of tests to be run, that
don't require entity/service/webapps to be configured, but do require
everything on the classpath).