David E. Jones wrote:
Nope. The users list is for users of OFBiz. The dev list is for
developers of OFBiz. There is commonly confusion around this point.
On the users list we don't care if the users is a developer
customizing OFBiz or an end user who is only seeing OFBiz from a web
browser.
Fair enough. But that's a lot of territory to cram into one small space.
Especially if you can't select topics to monitor and they all arrive in
the same inbox.
If you're trying to say that the community isn't geared up to support
end users who just touch OFBiz through a browser and are people
fulfilling orders and managing warehouses, then you're are 100%
correct. This community is not even close to geared up for something
like that. Not even close. We also don't have major aspirations to
doing that because there would be a significant resource gap. If you
have some way of staffing such a thing that has eluded the rest of us,
please let us know!!!
David. I've been trying to do just that. I can't think of any other way
of putting it except to try thinking outside the box.
Turn the problem on it's head.
Web 2.0 remember, not 1.1.
Apply the principles of the Tao.
"By doing nothing, nothing is left undone."
You don't staff it. The users do it for themselves.
Nature abhors a vacuum.
You don't have to build the aeroplanes. Just clear a bit of space in the
brush for the one's already flying around in the air to land.
Apache is not the place to do that. Much too formal, professional,
intimidating for the average user.
Both you and Si have created the perfect airport with your own web sites
for executive jets to land.
But if you want to answer the question Si first raised more than 6
months ago in "Users - how to spur greater adoption - let's brainstorm!"
then that means creating a more populist kind of space where jumbo jets
can land
http://www.nabble.com/Users---how-to-spur-greater-adoption---let%27s-brainstorm%21-tf1566682.html#a4254938
(Yes. I know that means a longer runway. But the economics of clearing
web space are not equivalent to shifting earth).
It's true that to begin with you would need one or two volunteers from
this group to spend some time in the control tower guiding them in.
If the community were to ask for it, I'm sure somebody would stick up
their hand.
I'd volunteer, but I don't have the necessary knowledge. Put me in the
control tower for half a day and they'd be stacking up all the way back
to Timbuktu.
Ian
-David
On Jan 20, 2007, at 2:03 AM, Ian McNulty 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.
==============================================================================================
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
==============================================================================================
