The Budget data model has been in place for over 8 years, someone finally makes 
an attempt to build it out a little with some basic screens, services and data 
and you want that reverted?  

This is a step in the right direction, nothing more.  If you expect every 
improvement to be some sort of a step across the feature finish line then 
you're going to be disappointed over and over again because the community has 
never worked that way.

The only reason for a revert is when the step is in the wrong direction and 
will make working towards the finish line more difficult for future 
contributions.  I cannot fathom how that would be the case here given that the 
implementation are basic and virtually no design designs have been made (aside 
from a few StatusItem records that can easily be changed/added to).

Regards
Scott

On 20/06/2014, at 9:54 am, Pierre Smits <[email protected]> wrote:

> Adrian,
> 
> Thank you for your opinion. And for lowering the bar.
> 
> This code dump isn't a workable solution for - as a caption on the OFBiz
> website states - 'the best e-commerce and Enterprise Resource Planning
> (ERP) software available.
> 
> Instead it is a waste of time and an insult to everybody who designs and
> develops good, thought-through business solutions for OFBiz, and you should
> be offended to.
> 
> Did Hans hand over his committers userId and password to one of his junior
> developers or the intern of the week? Because this is definitely not even
> close to the same level of quality and coherence as the project mgt or
> scrum solution. And if he didn't, it can surely not be regarded as 'going
> the extra mile' visavis completeness or working with the community.
> 
> 
> 
> Pierre Smits
> 
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Adrian Crum <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> I don't see why it needs to be reverted. If it needs to be built out more,
>> then devs can supply patches for that.
>> 
>> There have been many times in the past where some basic functionality is
>> introduced to the project, and then it is up to the rest of the community
>> to finish building it out.
>> 
>> Adrian Crum
>> Sandglass Software
>> www.sandglass-software.com
>> 
>> 
>> On 6/19/2014 5:26 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi All,
>>> 
>>> I finally had some time to review the functionality and code submitted
>>> under:
>>> 
>>>    - http://svn.apache.org/r1573884
>>>    - http://svn.apache.org/r1574400
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The functionality is available in the demo environment on
>>> https://ofbiz-vm.apache.org:8443/accounting
>>> 
>>> The code is related to OFBIZ-3169
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3169>, but apparently the
>>> 
>>> committer (Hans Bakker) didn't feel the need to follow due process by
>>> adding the improvement as a patch for review by other community members
>>> before dumping it into trunk.
>>> Though it may seem that missing budget functionality can be regarded as a
>>> bug, it should be considered an improvement and therefore it should follow
>>> the Review-then-Commit principle in stead of Commit-then-Review.
>>> 
>>> Functionality overview:
>>> Basically the functionality allows users of the the accounting component
>>> to:
>>> 
>>>    - search and find existing budget request
>>>    - create a new budget request
>>>    - enhance the budget request with
>>>       - budget items
>>>       - budget request roles
>>>       - budget request reviews
>>>    - change the status of the budget request
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Findings:
>>> First of all, documentation describing the functionality and how to use it
>>> is not available. This is a mayor omission. Assessment of usability by end
>>> users is hindered by this lacking.
>>> 
>>> Secondly, the functionality as presented works. No errors occurred when
>>> clicking on the various buttons and executing basic process steps, like:
>>> 
>>>    - adding removing budget items
>>>    - adding and removing a review
>>>    - adding and removing a role
>>>    - Changing the status of the budget request
>>> 
>>> 
>>> But, can we say that this functionality is complete and lifts OFBiz in
>>> general and the accounting module in particular a step higher on the
>>> ladder
>>> towards best of breed in the category 'Open Source ERP Projects c.q.
>>> Solutions'?
>>> 
>>> It definitely does not. The functionality appears, though included in the
>>> accounting module, to be an island. Budgets in general (and at least), are
>>> related to organisations (in OFBiz the internal organisations), P&L
>>> centers, gl accounts, and persons. This is lacking in the functionality.
>>> No
>>> internal organisation can be assigned, nor a P&L center or at the lowest a
>>> gl account. Budgets without such associations are meaningless.
>>> 
>>> No permissions where incorporated in menu-items to ensure that
>>> functionalities can only be executed by appropriate users. No roles were
>>> predefined, which is customarily applicable regarding this kind of
>>> functionality. Not every users having access should be able to create
>>> budget request, or perform subsequent actions.
>>> 
>>> Lacking this, the user can (must?) select any partyId and roleId to
>>> associate with the budget request. Even parties not working with (or
>>> allowed to work with) OFBiz in general and the accounting module in
>>> particular can be selected.
>>> But also due to the lacking possibility to set the internal organisation,
>>> no default currency is set. Thus, making the amounts ambiguous to
>>> interpret.
>>> 
>>> Furthermore it provides only a basic workflow process consisting of
>>> (approve, reject and review). Associating a party to a budget request
>>> doesn't warrant that others can not manipulate the content/data associated
>>> with the request. When I approved a budget request, I had the button to
>>> reject available. This shouldn't be possible. And at one occasion I could
>>> click the 'reject' button multipe time to get to the final state.
>>> While status changes are registered, it should also show who invoked the
>>> status change.
>>> 
>>> Due to the fact that arbitrarily any party can be associated to a budget
>>> request without any restrictions, the workflow is rendered meaningless.
>>> 
>>> Conclusion(s):
>>> This solutions hasn't been thought through properly and does no good for
>>> the quality of OFBiz (both the project and the product) in general and for
>>> the accounting module in particular. Prior to dumping the code into trunk
>>> it should have been posted for review by the community, so this could have
>>> been avoided.
>>> 
>>> If any other contributor to this project made such a set of
>>> functionalities
>>> available as a patch to an OFBiz issue in JIRA, it would sit there for a
>>> great length of time before it would have been committed.
>>> 
>>> I advice to remove it from trunk.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Pierre Smits
>>> 
>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>> 
>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>> 
>>> 

Reply via email to