Si,
Your comments seem to go quite a bit beyond the concern about it not
working 100%. If that was a requirement for functionality in OFBiz we
should really cull quite a lot from the project...
If something is not working 100% (and the Shark stuff IS working,
just not all of it, and it certainly needs to be updated to use a
newer and really released version of Shark), and there is no one
working on it, and it is causing problems, then we should leave it
disabled by default (which I think it is what Jacopo was proposing),
not remove it from the project.
The specialized directory is really meant for other things, namely
application level pieces that are for a specialized and not generic
purpose. Of course, some application like the OTS stuff that started
that way haven't stayed that way, but that was really the point of it.
-David
On Oct 24, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Si Chen wrote:
David,
I think the concern that I have is that the Shark component really
doesn't work, there's doesn't seem to be any effort to get it to
work right now, and the SECAs do a great job of supporting real
work flow. If it worked, of course it's better to have a workflow
engine than not, but will that be the case at any foreseeable point
in the future? Might it be better to have it in specialized/ until
somebody can get it to work again?
On Oct 24, 2006, at 2:59 PM, David E Jones wrote:
It really isn't correct to say that the license is incompatible,
only that we can't distribute the jar files because of the license.
If we decide on this, we should decide based on goals for the
framework. Right now nothing outside of the shark component uses
Shark, so disabling it would be fine, but if we want to use
workflow in the future in OFBiz it isn't going to be based on the
OFBiz workflow engine (unless someone has a few thousand hours I
don't know about that they want to invest in this...).
So, do I understand from this that the direction we want to go is
to just not have a workflow engine in OFBiz?
Personally, I'd rather see the OFBiz workflow component go before
the Shark component, though it would certainly be nice if there
was another alternative with a friendlier license. Or perhaps the
Shark community would consider a change to the Apache license, or
if they still like the copy-left style stuff for code changes,
then perhaps the Mozilla license?
-David
On Oct 24, 2006, at 2:36 PM, Si Chen wrote:
I agree. How about we just move into that specialized/ SVN that
David has? Even if it worked, it still wouldn't make sense to
have it in the ASF SVN because the actual Shark is not license
compatible.
On Oct 24, 2006, at 1:12 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
What about disabling the Shark component?
It is a component that has never been completed, we have moved
outside of OFBiz the Shark jars (for license issues) and its
user interface is clearly not maintained updated with the rest
of the project: the Shark component is the only component,
together with the Content component :-( that still hosts
JPublish pages.
What do you think?
Jacopo
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
