Si,
The point is that it has little to do with what is happening now. The
question is, where do we want things to go?
-David
On Oct 25, 2006, at 10:50 AM, Si Chen wrote:
Hi David,
I hope my comments did not come across the wrong way. I think it
is more like what Jacopo is saying--whether that component is
actively used/maintained as part of the project or not. Certainly
I'm not saying that everybody and everything has to be perfect (and
certainly I am not), but sometimes it sees like there is nobody
using Shark any more in ofbiz. Of course, if I'm wrong, then we
should keep it in by all means.
On Oct 25, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
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]
Best Regards,
Si
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
