Typo: "design designs" -> "design decisions" Regards Scott
On 10/08/2014, at 11:25 am, Scott Gray <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >>>> >>>> >
