http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Apache+OFBiz+Getting+Started

[BJ Freeman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


I believe #3 is misleading.

Not really: I'm happy to offer feedback, but I really need something
that will work well now and well into the future so we can get things
going in our organization

This says to me that ofbiz is ready to be used as is.
yet in both the branch version as well as the trunk there are portions
that either have not be updated, or was only a skeleton.
I refer to the payment services, in this case.

The goal is to not have the expectation that it is like a program you
buy off the self.

so i propose something that indicates that portion may not function
properly and  will need the help of a consultant, if they don't have the
resources.

Or when they find a problem to submit a jira, though that has been
frowned on from what I have picked up in discussion about Jiras.

OR I realize this is a community effort application and May need extra
work to have it work the way I want.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJuBxwrP3NbaWWqE4RAmAjAJwIUY0wvaEPbWyrDXZVSKjv7xndEACglmy2
lKqJiMA0QXA1GalW9oyoH1Q=
=3zZ8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[David E Jones-3]

On Mar 11, 2009, at 2:17 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
> I believe #3 is misleading.
>
> Not really: I'm happy to offer feedback, but I really need something
> that will work well now and well into the future so we can get things
> going in our organization
>
> This says to me that ofbiz is ready to be used as is.
> yet in both the branch version as well as the trunk there are portions
> that either have not be updated, or was only a skeleton.
> I refer to the payment services, in this case.

All of this release stuff is about stability, not functionality.  
Realistically releases have little to do with functionality, and in  
fact the whole point of a release branch is to prioritize stability  
over functionality.

> The goal is to not have the expectation that it is like a program you
> buy off the self.

That's not necessarily true. The primary focus is on creating software  
that is easy to customize, but that doesn't mean we can't have apps  
that are meant to be used OOTB. In fact, the point of the  
specialpurpose components is to provide those sorts of apps.

Different people contribute different things according to what they  
want. Most _contributors_ want OFBiz to be a basis for a custom  
solution, but some want apps to use OOTB. The more contributions in  
the 2nd category the more OFBiz will move in that direction.

It's all up to "us".

> so i propose something that indicates that portion may not function
> properly and  will need the help of a consultant, if they don't have  
> the
> resources.
>
> Or when they find a problem to submit a jira, though that has been
> frowned on from what I have picked up in discussion about Jiras.

That is certainly NOT true.

> OR I realize this is a community effort application and May need extra
> work to have it work the way I want.

That is the case for all enterprise software. No package does  
everything a business needs unless it is customized. Larger companies  
usually spend for the customization (or try to, and all too often fail  
due to bad requirements gathering, designing, and to some extend  
planning and management). Smaller companies do things manually or use  
generic software like a spreadsheet to manage things semi-manually.

It's not something special about OFBiz, it's the nature of business  
and the current state of software that helps businesses automate.

-David


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFJuBxwrP3NbaWWqE4RAmAjAJwIUY0wvaEPbWyrDXZVSKjv7xndEACglmy2
> lKqJiMA0QXA1GalW9oyoH1Q=
> =3zZ8
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[BJ Freeman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I hope what I am saying is not taken as negative.
only I keep seeing people on the mailing list have expectation of having
 a complete ready to go system.
I a looking for a way to not help that illusion.

David E Jones sent the following on 3/11/2009 2:50 PM:

>
> On Mar 11, 2009, at 2:17 PM, BJ Freeman wrote:
>
>
> I believe #3 is misleading.
>
> Not really: I'm happy to offer feedback, but I really need something
> that will work well now and well into the future so we can get things
> going in our organization
>
> This says to me that ofbiz is ready to be used as is.
> yet in both the branch version as well as the trunk there are portions
> that either have not be updated, or was only a skeleton.
> I refer to the payment services, in this case.
>
>> All of this release stuff is about stability, not functionality.
>> Realistically releases have little to do with functionality, and in fact
>> the whole point of a release branch is to prioritize stability over
>> functionality.

to make sure I understand a release may not have all the Described
functionality working, but want to stabilize the functionality that does
work, to this point?
if that is the case I think that should be said.
>
> The goal is to not have the expectation that it is like a program you
> buy off the self.
>
>> That's not necessarily true. The primary focus is on creating software
>> that is easy to customize, but that doesn't mean we can't have apps that
>> are meant to be used OOTB. In fact, the point of the specialpurpose
>> components is to provide those sorts of apps.

>
>> Different people contribute different things according to what they
>> want. Most _contributors_ want OFBiz to be a basis for a custom
>> solution, but some want apps to use OOTB. The more contributions in the
>> 2nd category the more OFBiz will move in that direction.
>
>> It's all up to "us".
I don't disagree with this. I am no way trying to say it should be a
certain way. As a matter of fact this paragraph would be sufficient in
my opinion if added to #3

>
> so i propose something that indicates that portion may not function
> properly and  will need the help of a consultant, if they don't have the
> resources.
>
> Or when they find a problem to submit a jira, though that has been
> frowned on from what I have picked up in discussion about Jiras.
>
>> That is certainly NOT true.
>
> OR I realize this is a community effort application and May need extra
> work to have it work the way I want.
>
>> That is the case for all enterprise software. No package does everything
>> a business needs unless it is customized. Larger companies usually spend
>> for the customization (or try to, and all too often fail due to bad
>> requirements gathering, designing, and to some extend planning and
>> management). Smaller companies do things manually or use generic
>> software like a spreadsheet to manage things semi-manually.

Think I was not clear. I am not talking about having functionality like
BI, I am saying that if you show a tab for accounting then if someone is
familiar with accounting that tab functions will provide say a profit
and loss or information that can be used for taxes.
However you response about what is contributied would be a good thing to
put in addition to what is there and would satify what I was talking about.

>
>> It's not something special about OFBiz, it's the nature of business and
>> the current state of software that helps businesses automate.
>
>> -David
>
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJuFzwrP3NbaWWqE4RAlkGAJ9CTEGAkN2xRzldDvf6cocbQQNn/wCgoMFk
QX3Wn8UZjNtDEFM8/vdRg5I=
=vIXN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----