Hello Jacopo, Jacopo Cappellato <jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> writes:
> thank you for starting this interesting conversation. > I think it is fine to implement services in plain Java or in plain Groovy > methods and you have highlighted some of the advantages over their > implementation using the Groovy DSL. > However in my opinion the Groovy DSL (even in its current "basic" version, > implemented thru a few lines of code, that could be enhanced and extended) > has some advantages too and may be preferred by a different audience of > "users" that are more focused on business rules than on programming; data > preparation scripts are also a good fit for the DSL. Sure, allowing “business oriented” people to adapt OFBiz to their needs by letting them to automate a process in terms of business rules is *very* valuable. I never had the chance to exchange with people focused on business rules working with OFBiz which are able to write services/ECA/handlers. However I am rather skeptic regarding your claim that the Groovy service DSL allows a wider audience to adapt/compose OFBiz services to their needs. I guess it serves more as a “fun” thing for programmers to play with, than something with an effective business value. In my opinion improving simplicity (locality, uniformity, value orientation, ...) would be far more effective at empowering both business and code oriented programmers. [1] Thanks for sharing your view. [1] https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy-QCon-London-2012 -- Mathieu Lirzin GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
