I was thinking more about the 3rd party artifacts that can not be
included in releases but need to be installed before OFBiz can run.
I guess that I am assuming that eventually a user will get some sort of
installer that will take all of the various components developed by
OFBiz, find all of the (OFBiz and3rd-party libraries) libraries required
to run the options (plug-ins or core features) selected during the
installation dialogue and organize them in a folder structure and run
the required setup processes to load the seed data and load any industry
or application-specific seed data selected.
I am also looking forward to the day that the framework will be
available as a separate product with no dependencies on the ERP and the
ERP will have a number of modules with a hierarchy of dependencies
rather than a web.
Ron
On 22/07/2016 10:12 AM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
Hi Ron,
Maven and Jcenter are jar repositories. OFBiz components are not jars, so I
am not sure but I think it would not fit, unless perhaps we can jar and
unjar the folder not sure.
On Friday, 22 July 2016, Ron Wheeler <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> wrote:
For 3rd party libraries, would Maven Central be a good source?
Everything is there that does not need a license to access
There is a well defined and well supported service for getting artifacts.
Ron
On 22/07/2016 9:31 AM, Nicolas Malin wrote:
Hi,
Taher I like you proposal, and I wish to add some complement :)
hot-deploy is to manage specific customer site component with the
business logic specific to each, Apache OFBiz can help to prepare this but
do not more (I will like to have this as best practice)
I agree to add a new directory plugins and structure it for the future
vision :
* add capacity to download a plugin from the asf repo
* support extension to download from a third plateform (like the
/etc/apt/source.list on debian)
* manage namespace and as you said dependencies. Need give some coding
contions
We can create the plugins directory, and keep specialpurpose on a first
step and move step by step each component present.
I imagine a process like this :
* ./gradlew installPlugin org.apache.ofbiz.framework.birt :
-> check if birt is present on the plugins directory, if not download
from
svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz-pulgins/branches/relatedRelease/org/apache/ofbiz/framework/birt
-> enable it on component-load
-> compile, load init date and run init service
When you run ./gradlew installAllPlugin :
* Realize installPlugin on all know plugins, with the official apache
ofbiz release, only plugins present on
svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ofbiz-pulgins/branches/relatedRelease/org/apache/ofbiz/
Nicolas
Le 20/07/2016 à 07:29, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
Hi Pierre, all,
I think perhaps my proposal was short and therefore your understanding of
it is a bit different than what I had in mind. So I list below more
specifically what I mean about each point from the ones you mentioned
above
to further fine-tune the discussion.
- The difference between createComponent and createPlugin is that the
plugin resides in /plugins instead of hot-deploy and added to
component-load.xml and also contains a build.gradle file designed
specifically for plugins. This script contains standard tasks like
install,
uninstall, perhaps even upgrade. The magic work for plugins will be in
their build scripts to integrate tightly with OFBiz.
- The activate/deactivate tasks are just a little convenience tasks that
add/remove components to the component-load.xml instead of editing it by
hand so it is just using what exists. Gradle completely ignores a
component
if it does not exist in component-load.xml and would not even compile it.
So you can think of this as just providing more ease to the end-user,
similar to your suggestion with the createComponent.
- The install/uninstall tasks are not just a copy-paste of folders. It
actually executes business logic (optionally) for any plugin author who
wishes to execute it (by calling specific tasks in build.gradle for that
plugin). For example, it might apply patches on some core applications
(and
reverse patches in case of uninstall). Now our standard plugins do not
touch applications or framework, but since we are introducing this
feature
I'm trying to also combine a unified solution for all plugins (Apache
supported and 3rd party). So in one shot we have both ease of use for the
existing components and at the same time a general purpose plugin system.
We might even have a task like say "updatePlugin" in the future and it is
also possible to introduce rudimentary dependency management (Gradle is
really good at this).
Finally, what to do about specialpurpose is something we should
definitely
tackle, however what I am suggesting right now is some foundational work
that gives you easy choices when you need to make them, and it has the
added bonus of introducing a plugin system for OFBiz which is badly
needed
to protect the core framework and applications and to provide an
eco-system
around it. I'm trying to reach a win-win solution if you will.
Regards,
Taher Alkhateeb
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 1:18 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
Le 19/07/2016 à 22:57, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
the graph needs to be checked/amended to possibly remove components
dependencies only introduced by the data model
Sorry, I have noticed I have the bad tendency of using the word
"introduced" instead of "put" or "add" (due to "introduire" false
friend in
French) please replace for me when you see it, thanks! :)
Here the right word would have been "due to" instead of "introduced by"
Jacques
PS: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=introduction
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
