Jonathon, David,
> It sounds like what I wrote about applications well suited for real
world
> OOTB use didn't make it through. The point I was trying to make is that
> generic user interfaces will never be well suited to all possible
tasks. In
> order to create a true fully feature system to use OOTB you have to
define a
> target audience, like a specific type of company to create a
complete system
> for.
Yes, that did come through to me. I personally don't think a
"one-size-fits-all" solution exists, but then I'm not the creator of
AirAsia (one-size-fits-all airways passenger service).
Let's try a slightly different tack. Tailor-made is what we're talking
about here.
Tailor-made suits fit like a glove and cost more than most of us can afford.
There was a time when that was all there was, and tailor shops on street
corner were as common as greengrocers. But tailor-made suits were so
expensive that most ordinary working people bought only one of two in a
lifetime. Sunday-Best they used to call it. Preserved in mothballs in
the wardrobe and only ever worn for church. Of course for top-drawer
executives it was different. But then it always is.
When the first off-the peg chain stores started appearing on the High
Street, almost everybody was appalled. First into battle were the
tailors in their corner shops.
How can one size fit everybody?
Well, of course it can't.
The great leap forward - the Blue Ocean thinking outside the box - was
to produce a carefully banded range of sizes, to fit most of the people
most of the time.
"But then no size will ever fit anybody," was the next outraged cry.
Well of course they can't. Never could. Never would. And still don't!
The trick was to produce suit designs where it doesn't really matter.
Pile them high and bang them out at prices everyone could afford. Making
the leap from fitting some of the people all of the time to fitting most
of the people most of the time was all it took to turn a whole industry
completely upside down.
The average tailor on the average corner quickly lost the plot. The
master tailors in Saville Row upped their prices even more.
Personally I thing that's all very sad. But you can't stop progress.
That's the way all technology goes. One-off automobiles for the aristos
give way to Model T Ford's for the masses, putting average tailor-made
manufacturers out of business and leaving a small niche of
master-tailors servicing the extremely well-off who would never be
caught dead in anything off-the-peg.
If David is saying is that he wants to stay tailoring for the executives
and is appalled at the idea of selling ill-fitting suits to the masses
then no way would I want to knock that.
But you can't stop progress. Somebody somewhere will do it, even if we
don't.
If I was a master tailor faced with that kind of situation I guess the
clever way to go would be to build credibility servicing my bespoke
clients, and then label the off-the-peg, no-size-fits-anybody stuff with
the brand.
Like Yves St. Laurent, Gucci, Calvin Klein, Prada, Dior, Versace and Chanel.
Come to think of it. Isn't that the way the whole clothing business has
gone? Who cares if it fits anybody? Just as long as it's got a good name
on the tin.
Because I consider you the father of this movement! We all need an
anchor, the original vision, original visionary. You're it for me. I
don't know what the rest of the folks think.
I may accidentally reinvent wheels in my fervent rush to round off
OFBiz. But I'm certainly not gonna reinvent YOU. So what if I wake up
tomorrow with an idea similar to what you throw up years ago? I need a
point of reference, not many Jonathon-Speak-A-Louds down the road with
the same idea every year. I want to know I only have to memorize one
name --- David E. Jones --- when it comes to OFBiz.
Sorry if you've become a brand name. But sorry too that I can't change
that for you. Talk to the market and masses.
You know something David. If I was you I'd be wanting to give this guy a
medal, not a hard time.
Ian
David E. Jones wrote:
On Jan 22, 2007, at 5:28 PM, Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
Right off bat, you'll see some functionalities fully fleshed out
(half-baked in mainstream OFBiz). You'll also spot (or not spot)
many bugsfixes.
For now, I'm just moving my boss' OFBiz along his requirements. But
if you, like Ian, has a vision for fleshing out all "best practices"
(commonly needed, "duh, why isn't it there" functionalities), then
you are free (like Ian is) to submit issues (via Mantis) to me.
Together, we'll:
1. Round off all half-implemented concepts so newcomers don't have
so many red
herrings to deal with.
2. Document all fully-implemented concepts so newcomers know that
undocumented
concepts are either not there or not fully there.
The above is something David has clearly said he will not address
(not OOTB-oriented).
That is simply not true. I never said I would not address it, and of
course since the fact is that I am not OFBiz I should also make it
clear that this is not the OFBiz policy. I never said we would not do
something that works great OOTB, I just said that is not currently
the focus of OFBiz given that we have to set priorities so that
limited resources are best used, and that we have a sustainable model
for growing and perpetuating the project.
Besides, for the 2 issues you mentioned above, what do they have to
do with OOTB use orientation? Those 2 things sound a lot like exactly
what we're doing in OFBiz right now...
So, it's open season for us. :) We'll be swimming in another pond,
so David shouldn't mind.
This is true though. It is always open season for you. There are
means for contribution and the more you contribute and get involved
in the project the more we'll want to give you permissions so it is
easier for us to work together.
I do stress that this isn't a fork of OFBiz.
Hmmmm.... if you're encouraging people to send you fixes and
enhancements that are core to OFBiz instead of sending them to the
main project, that sounds an awful lot like a fork to me...
If that's not a fork, what is?
I don't support dilution of open source resources (yes yes, in many
cases it's simply necessary, and yes I do have my own fork of
hibernated project phpMVC, even relatively active Mantis, and many
others).
(* military band starting to drum a march *)
Some of us may be currently breaking off to handle smaller
skirmishes (smaller clients who cannot afford non-OOTB, big
customization projects); some will stay in fatherland factory to
continue plodding along, serving the bigger (easier?) clients. I
believe David will give his blessing to those of us who will venture
out, who stick our necks out to take the horizons.
I don't see how any of this is necessary. To have a better OOTB
experience we need feedback from users including bug reports, bug
fixes, and enhancements as well. It sounds like this is mostly what
you are proposing.
It sounds like what I wrote about applications well suited for real
world OOTB use didn't make it through. The point I was trying to make
is that generic user interfaces will never be well suited to all
possible tasks. In order to create a true fully feature system to use
OOTB you have to define a target audience, like a specific type of
company to create a complete system for.
Lastly a quick question: why do you keep saying my name? What in
blazes does ANY OF THIS have to do with me? I don't own OFBiz. I
don't control OFBiz. I don't even implement most of what goes into
OFBiz any more. I'm just a moderator trying to keep things flowing
smoothly for the project and clarify to the best of what I can see
what is and isn't a good idea. I can't force anyone to do anything,
nor can I even manage and moderate every bit that makes it into the
project. That just isn't realistic. This is why there is an
organization and why we need more people involved with the project.
So, yes, you can create your own project and try to recruit people to
it. I just hope you have a long term sustainable plan, direction, and
scope for it.
-David
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
==============================================================================================
