Chris,
*hand up!*
But that's after I'm done with my 13 days to project deadline, or 13 weeks after I get fired.
(Which probably is the same circumstance for every other member in this community!)
But you're right. Resources needed. Not always money, but something at least. Time or brain cells.
And to get that, we'll need a massive recruitment engine.
To be honest, I was not quite recruited, or not recruited the right way. As boss and I was looking
back to time when we first spoke with Si Chen, it had seemed I wouldn't have gotten into "working"
OFBiz if I hadn't taken apart the plane, complained to BoingBoing Bad Planes, Inc, and showed them
I could fix stuff. BUT... but all this is understandable. Do you have time of day to write me docs
on how to use Notepad? Nope. But still, it's hard to imagine manufacturers that send you user
manuals AFTER you've sent them a blueprint you drew up yourself. Oh, that happens, some products
made in east side of world.
Ian and you have a point, it starts somewhere. Do we take time to write docs (welcome more users),
or do we spend time to earn money/time to write docs? Chicken and egg problem. Maybe we just need
the right kind of contributors to start the spark (billionaires? or madmax workaholics/fanatics
like me?).
And David is also right. There are multitudes of folks who come in, grab help, get out. I'm not
like that (recruit me! recruit me!).
I see a time when ERPs around the world are OFBiz-standard or OFBiz-certified.
In any case, I'm with you! *military band music wafting into scene*. Tell me where I can do some
damage! Er, I mean docs.
Jonathon
Chris Howe wrote:
It only took Debian 13 years to create a users list
and the keen interest of a billionaire philanthropist.
I think we could get a _real users list with either
half of that equation. Who's with me? ;-)
--- Ian McNulty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Nothing at all wrong with the link.
It's what it's linking too that's the problem.
The topics... the layout... everything speaks to me
of engineering
plans, not flight plans.
To start building a flight plan you need a blank
page, not one that is
already half full with wiring diagrams.
Even Anil thought he was talking to the Dev not the
Users list !!!
Imo there is no users list. If a pilot came across
ofbiz.apache.org he
would know at first glance he was in the wrong
place.
The difference is between www.ubuntu.com/ and
www.debian.org/ The first
welcomes the uninitiated and draws them in. The
second looks like a
wonderful resource for engineers. We're not talking
about all the
manuals and small print inside the box. Where
talking about what it says
at first glance on the tin.
I think I can see where the confusion arises.
You can focus on one or the other, but you can't
focus on both on the
same page. (Yes, I know this contradicts my earlier
post. But it's a
question of focus. On the user pages the wiring
needs to be there, but
buried behind the dashboard. On the engineering
pages the reverse it true.)
On Si's recommendation I've started reading Bruce
Eckel's 'Thinking In
Java.' In Chapter 1 under 'The hidden
implementation' he draws a
distinction between 'Class Creators' and 'Client
Programmers.'
Client Programmers are users of the objects produced
by Class Creators -
much of which they are deliberately locked out from
to prevent them
monkeying around with things they do not fully
understand.
To me, the Dev list is for class creators. The Users
list for Client
Programmers.
There is no users list.
Ian
David E. Jones wrote:
Is there something wrong with the current OFBiz
wiki linked to below?
http://docs.ofbiz.org/pages/listpages-dirview.action?key=OFBIZ
-David
On Jan 18, 2007, at 1:23 PM, Leon Torres wrote:
I also believe it would be worthwhile to
experiment with an open
ofbiz wiki. As the ofbiz community continues to
grow, we will
certainly attain the critical mass necessary to
make such a thing work.
For instance, we've authored a bunch of cookbooks
in .txt format
about specific tricks and how-to's in OFBIZ:
http://www.opensourcestrategies.com/ofbiz/tutorials.php
Unfortunately contributing to those is hard
because it takes an
investment in time to read, verify, and update
the documents on our
end. If they were in the form of an open wiki,
it would be far
easier to expand on them.
- Leon
Florin Jurcovici wrote:
IMO, an open wiki is the right thing to do. Even
if I had some
experience which I'd like to share, if the wiki
is closed or
restricted, I cannot. Some maintainers should
review docs
occasionally and correct or delete them if they
are not OK, maybe
draw an outline of the documentation at the
beginning then let
whoever is willing to fill the pages. But IMO a
closed/restricted
wiki is not the way to go.
--Florin Jurcovici
------------------
Why do psychics have to ask you for your name?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mcnultyMEDIA
60 Birkdale Gardens
Durham
DH1 2UL
t: +44 (0)191 384 4736
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
w: www.mcnultymedia.co.uk
==============================================================================================
This communication is for the exclusive use of the
intended recipient(s) named above and is
confidential. Any form of distribution, copying,
discussion or use of this communication, its
contents, or any information contained herein
without prior consent is strictly prohibited. If you
receive this communication in error, please notify
the sender by email or by telephone on +44 (0)191
384 4736
This email has been checked for viruses, however, we
cannot accept any liability sustained as a result of
software viruses and would recommend that you carry
out your own virus checks before opening any
attachment.
==============================================================================================
