Right now the Shark data model is mostly separate from the OFBiz data
model, though it is run in the same database for convenience.
-David
On Nov 5, 2006, at 2:08 AM, Chris Howe wrote:
regarding dependencies. While Pentaho doesn't have
the same database manipulation tools that OFBiz has,
they don't attempt to mix the shark database with
theirs. Would this be a better approach (to leave
shark outside of OFBiz's data model)?
--- Jacopo Cappellato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think that another task we should consider is
removing the
dependencies to the old "workflow" component; I've
noticed that there
are some fields in the WorkEffort entity that are
related to the
workflow component and there is also some java
classes (in the order and
workeffort components) that use workflow's classes.
In general, it would be nice for the new Shark
integration (but I don't
know if possible) to avoid this kind of dependencies
and make the work
flow engine an optional/external/pluggable tool.
Jacopo
David E Jones wrote:
The best person to address this is Andy as he has
done most of the work
on Shark to date.
The first thing that needs to be done is to update
to the most recent
version of Shark. The one Andy wrote against is
not an official release
and is a couple of years old.
Once that is done it needs to be tested and at
least one PoC application
of it done, perhaps replacing the old order
authorization workflow that
now runs on the OFBiz Workflow Engine.
The best way to see what exists and what doesn't
is probably to just run
it and play around...
-David
On Nov 4, 2006, at 9:33 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
I've been continuing to look at Pentaho and it
has
Shark integrated into it and I'm starting to see
the
benefit that it may offer. Over the past two
years
I've sporadically seen posts about shark not
being
fully implemented, etc. Could someone answer
these
two questions...
What exactly is encompassed by "fully
implemented"?
How much of that is done and what remains?
