mil gracias adelante!
On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 11:22 AM VICTOR MANUEL ROMERO RODRIGUEZ < [email protected]> wrote: > James, > > Let me check the Fineract CN documentation. And also the code base. > > When we started the project we found that was matute enough to be a > starting point and the microservice approach was perfect for the Business > needs. > > It was requiered to train the developer in the blue prints for reaching > the maturity and of course remove the dependencies of some components like > provisioners.. > And I think the name of the microservice must be more self descriptive... > Anubis.. Feign... New comers will be confused. > > I would pick up recent improvements from the Fineract 1.x like > multidatabase, UTC for transactions, spring batch, logging, node aware, > read only and change the Cassandra to Kafka. > > The goal must be the same as fineract but with an easy to use approach. > When we started to use the Fineract CN it gives the impresión that we need > a full datacenter with lot of engineers to be deployed. > > Because we have go for our own in the payment solution that we have > developed, can be contributed back. > > Although I think that the modular approach for Fineract 1.x is good, the > microservice approach is better, in this way se dont have circular > dependencies, JVM versión issues, neither license mix issues. Our "glue" > for reducing the coding and custom changes have been the api gateways and > Camunda. > > Let me work on the links shared and do the things as the mexican way, with > resultas and goals reached :) > > Keep you in the loop > > El vie., 21 de octubre de 2022 3:12 p. m., James Dailey < > [email protected]> escribió: > >> Hi Victor - >> >> I appreciate your contributions and hope that given your expertise in >> leveraging the FineractCN code base, that we get you more involved here in >> a positive discussion. >> >> Could you describe what you think should be the roadmap for FineractCN? >> Currently the code is sitting in an official status of not-released at >> Apache. There is a formal release process as you know ==> >> https://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html >> >> Given community progress in updating Fineract1.x and making it more >> scalable, and the idea of using Fineract1.x as its own “microservice”, I >> think that the FineractCN strategy needs updating. We are considering >> Fineract1.x as almost a Microservice and also a strategy of breaking >> Fineract1.x into different jars and thus making it more composable. Thus >> perhaps we want to consider fineractCN within that context? >> >> I would propose that we collectively define the Minimal Viable Release as >> a running instance that can be leveraged by outside firms. This is more of >> a framework concept with the ability to register new microservices within >> that framework. >> >> Do you think we should modify the description of FineracCN on the wiki? >> It does create some potential points of confusion for people coming to the >> project. >> >> I understand you’re still trying to get code contributions approved by >> partner orgs. While that is ongoing is there a framework idea and approach >> we can move forward on? >> >> If I’ve misunderstood, please let me know. >> >> Thanks , >> >> Jdailey >> >> >> >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 6:36 AM Anjil R Chinnapatlolla < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Dear Fineract community members, >>> >>> >>> >>> Looking for exploring the current version of Fineract CN and possible >>> opportunities to contribute to the project. >>> >>> Can someone please help me point to the relevant material related to >>> Fineract-CN’s current status and if it is being considered for active >>> development. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks&Regards, >>> >>> Anjil >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>
