On Nov 13, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: > Scott, > > I agree that the community changes ofbiz by committing. And as a > non-committer and just and end user, all I have is a voice. > > I just found the arguments against the proposal to be unfounded and not in > the best interests of the ofbiz project. For example, the comment about > disk space and memory being cheap can't be serious -
OFBiz can run on a low end personal computer, with all its component loaded (even the optional ones)... so I don't see the point of worrying for small companies' hardware budget. For companies with high load/traffic, the money for memory/disk space is irrelevant... by the way, a few hundreds of empty tables just waste an irrelevant amount of space. > there aren't many examples of monolithic software anymore. As I already told you, and as you should already know, OFBiz is *not* a monolithic software, the contrary is true. > > I think rather than hearing just objections, I would have preferred to have > heard a response along the lines of: > > "the idea sounds interesting and warrants more investigation - please feel > free to put a design or prototype together". Christopher, it was not my intention to discourage you or discard your idea; I just wanted to warn you that trying to decouple components like for example "order" and "product" would be very difficult; and, to be super clear, it is not difficult because we are not using Maven, but it is difficult because of the real world interdependencies of most of the use cases and business rules. Of course, feel free to put a design and prototype together, I will be pleased to see it in action and I am sure that others will be as well. Kind regards, Jacopo > Cheers, > > Chris > > > Scott Gray wrote: >> Chris, >> >> Very few things are ever not an option, but just because someone turns up on >> the mailing list out of nowhere and proposes something vague doesn't mean >> that it is suddenly a valid idea that everyone should take seriously. OFBiz >> like every other apache project is a meritocracy, the people in "control" >> are the people who actually get things done for the project. >> >> Regards >> Scott >> >> On 13/11/2009, at 11:53 PM, Christopher Snow wrote: >> >>> >>>>> Also, there's the security issues of having code running that isn't >>>>> required. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, I get the picture. A modular ofbiz is not an option! People in >>>>> control like ofbiz just the way it is - it suits their business model. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, you didn't get the picture, at all. >>>> Please read the messages carefully and try to understand them before >>>> attributing to others concepts that they don't expressed. >>>> And I am not in control of OFBiz... >>>> >>>> Jacopo >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Great, so a modular ofbiz IS an option? >>> >>> >>> >> >
