Following that train of thought a bit further, has there been any discussion
on offering Mifos under the SaaS (Software-as-aService) model, a hosted
ASP/BSP (Application Service Provider/Business Service Provider) type
solution? It seems to me that there would be tremendous value - lower costs,
greater flexibility and faster implementations - for the MFIs of the world
in this type of scenario.

On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 7:52 PM, Van Mittal-Henkle <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  Hi Soham,
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this.
>
> This is a topic that we have been thinking about and it will be one of the
> areas that we look at after the 1.1 release.
>
> In general Mifos could be much more modular than it is now.  As you
> mention, you can imagine that Mifos could provide multiple modules that
> could each exist independent of one another.  When Mifos is configured, a
> given deployment could pick and choose what feature set they needed and
> Mifos could load only those modules (features) which were selected via
> configuration.
>
> There are various ways that this basic idea could be realized and after
> our 1.1 relase I anticipate that there will be some good discussions on
> this topic.
>
> Cheers,
> --Van
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Soham Dhakal
> *Sent:* Tuesday, February 05, 2008 9:31 PM
> *To:* 'Mifos functional discussions'
> *Cc:* 'Developer'
> *Subject:* [Mifos-developer] Discussion around Functional Modules
> andUpgrading /downgrading
>
>  Hi all,
> I was going to put off this discussion till after 1.1 but thought I would
> send it just so we have a discussion going.
>
> As it stands in mifos, every funtionality that is developed is
> integrated (now this might be to make it easier for MFIs). But once a lot
> of custom requirements are added as mifos gains popularity, this could lead
> to features that MFIs do not need. And  the upgrade of functionality is
> very linear, meaning i have to upgrade in sequence regardless of the
> functionality I want.
>
> Are there plans to make it more feature oriented?
>
> For e.g. A feature is developed based on version 1.1 code. Now as a MFI I
> want to just add that feature without taking other features before that
> (granted rules around dependencies are followed etc)..
> I  presume, as features are added, hardware requirements might change
> (disk space, RAM) so it would be nice if MFIs could pick and choose with
> feature they would like to have given the hardware costs. I mean currently
> there are settings which can "turn off/on" a feature, and perhaps this can
> address this concern. But i think if there was a modular (kinda like plugin)
> concept, MFIs could pick and choose features they want installed.
>
> Also, i am thinking of the scenario where an MFI is having issues with
> particular functionality in their production env, and want to want to back
> it out, but not downgrade all the way down.
>
> I do realize that this discussion might be a little early in the product
> lifecycle because most of the features built and being built are pretty
> generic. but we might want to think about how we are going to continue
> adding features to mifos.
>
> Furthermore, (for developers) when we submit a patch and base it on a
> revision, by the time the patch is applied the database version and app
> version might have been different because of other patches in queue. Once we
> have more and more people participating this might get tedious. So if we
> based upgrades on feature set, and check conditions against that feature
> (for checking passivity, dependency) it might be easier.
>
> Finally, this kind of discussion might have already taken place, and given
> the traget and use of mifos, the cost might outweigh the benefit. However I
> am just thinking out loud and wanted to see what others think.
>
> Regards
> Soham
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/

Reply via email to