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
>>>>>           
>>>>       
>> 
>>  
> 

Reply via email to