David, all,
the shark, and workflow, components are not causing any problems to me,
but it would be nice, from time to time, to review the existing
components and try to understand if they are still 'alive' and what we
can do to improve them etc... (especially the ones with a user
interface, because are the ones every new user jumps in).
For example, the migration from JPublish to the widgets is now complete
except for the content and shark applications and I'd really love to see
that effort finalized as soon as possible; I'm wondering if it makes
sense to put some effort in converting the Shark's pages or not.
To partially address these points I'd propose one of the two options:
a) change the name of the application's tab from "Shark" to something
that is more generic such as "Workflow"
b) disable the "workflow" and "shark" components (i.e. comment them in
component-load.xml) and create a new Jira issue that describes to
current status of these components, what it is needed to run them and
possible future plans about them
I'd prefer the latter solution but the former one would be enough for now.
Does it make sense?
Jacopo
David E Jones wrote:
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]
