hi Chris,

Thanks.

For me, I need user, organization, role, permission functionalities from
party management. But I think you are right that maybe we need a more
elegant party management from framework perspective. Or maybe we even don't
need party in the framework. (Just like JIRA did. JIRA implemented its own
user/permission/role)

--
Regards,
Michael Xu (xudong)
www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 | Mobile: (86) 135 0135
9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096


On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:21 PM, Christopher Snow <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> The problem with putting in the Party component is that it will throw up
> errors due to dependencies on other components.  (Try it and see!)
>
> It is likely that a new component will be required (i.e. developed) for
> a standalone framework that has basic user account management
> functionality.
>
> What party management functionality would you want to see in the
> standalone framework?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> Michael Xu (xudong) wrote:
> > hi Christopher,
> >
> > That wiki page looks great. Thanks.
> >
> > Do we need to remain Party there as part of framework?
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Michael Xu (xudong)
> > www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 | Mobile: (86) 135
> 0135
> > 9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM, Christopher Snow <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I've also started putting a page together on the steps for manually
> >> separating the core framework:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Ofbiz+as+a+development+framework
> >>
> >> The pages are just my documentation of the steps needed.  I still think
> its
> >> a good idea to have a page for collecting the requirements.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Christopher Snow wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Sounds good to me!
> >>>
> >>> Bruno Busco wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Should we try to write a "framework-only" feature proposal page like
> >>>> the one Scott has writted for "Saved Searches"
> >>>> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Saved+Searches
> >>>> collecting all requirements from the mails?
> >>>>
> >>>> Having the path written could help volunteers to contribute in the
> >>>> right direction.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Bruno
> >>>>
> >>>> 2009/12/4 Christopher Snow <[email protected]>:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> That makes a lot of sense - thanks again Scott!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Scott Gray wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> That risk is run by anybody who gets the ball rolling on any new
> >>>>>> proposal, be it a contributor, committer or PMC member.  Nobody is
> >>>>>> capable of pushing through substantial change without the approval
> of
> >>>>>> the community at large.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The key for any amount of work is to collaborate with the community
> as
> >>>>>> much as possible, if something is large then just break it down and
> >>>>>> discuss each change piece by piece.  An approach such as this
> >>>>>> substantially reduces the risk that any work done will be wasted and
> >>>>>> generally improves the overall design.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Regards
> >>>>>> Scott
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 4/12/2009, at 7:27 PM, chris snow wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Hi Adrian,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For a change that may be substantial, could this approach be quite
> >>>>>>> risky
> >>>>>>> that a lot of time could be spent developing something that may not
> be
> >>>>>>> accepted?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Many thanks,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Chris
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That is not how the open source community works. If anyone wants
> to
> >>>>>>>> see
> >>>>>>>> this move along, they need to make the desired changes to their
> local
> >>>>>>>> copy, create a patch, and submit it to Jira.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> As far as coordination is concerned, there is an "umbrella" Jira
> >>>>>>>> issue
> >>>>>>>> for this already. Just make new Jira issues sub-tasks of it.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Adrian
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Michael Xu (xudong) wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> hi,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Like Bruno mentioned, this topic has been discussed over many
> >>>>>>>>> times. And
> >>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>> is time to take some actions. I really think one or more leaders
> >>>>>>>>> should
> >>>>>>>>> lead
> >>>>>>>>> the process. Otherwise, the discussion might be around for a long
> >>>>>>>>> long
> >>>>>>>>> time.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>> Michael Xu (xudong)
> >>>>>>>>> www.wizitsoft.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:41 PM, chris snow <[email protected]>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Bruno,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I would like to help.  Are you coordinating efforts?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Many thanks,
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Chris
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Bruno Busco wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Michael,
> >>>>>>>>>>> the framework isolation and a framework-only installation is
> >>>>>>>>>>> definitely something the community as talken about many times.
> You
> >>>>>>>>>>> will find several conversations searching the mailing list.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> We will have it sooner or later and any help you could provide
> on
> >>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>> topic will be much appreciated.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> -Bruno
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2009/11/24 Michael Xu (xudong) <[email protected]>:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> hmm...I compared the article and the latest code from trunk. I
> >>>>>>>>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>>>>>> think
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the diagram is consistent with codes.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> For example, from the diagram party doesn't depend on
> marketing;
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> however,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> as
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I mentioned in previous email, party entity definition does
> use
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ContactListParty from marketing.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Xu (xudong)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 |
> Mobile:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> (86)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 135
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 0135
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Michael Xu (xudong)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just found an article about the dependency:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> From
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the component relationship diagram, it seems I have to include
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> components under framework and application in my new
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> application. Is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> correct?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Xu (xudong)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 |
> Mobile:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (86)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 135
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> 0135 9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Michael Xu (xudong) <
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> hi all,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I try to build a new application using ofbiz. Basically, I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> use
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nice overall architect of ofbiz, theme mechanism and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Party/Permission/SecurityGroup. However, I found it is very
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> difficult
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> remove unnecessary components.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> For example, entitymodel.xml from applications/party
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses ContactListParty, which is from marketing component. I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> think
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> such
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependency doesn't make much sense, as marketing is only an
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> optional
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> component but party is a must.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What's the best practice for my case? Advices and clues will
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> be very
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> appreciated. Thanks in advance.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michael Xu
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> View this message in context:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> http://n4.nabble.com/about-using-ofbiz-as-a-platform-tp786778p933001.html
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> View this message in context:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> http://n4.nabble.com/about-using-ofbiz-as-a-platform-tp786778p948290.html
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tel: 01453 890660
> >>>>> Mob: 07944 880950
> >>>>> Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >> --
> >> Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP
> >>
> >> Tel: 01453 890660
> >> Mob: 07944 880950
> >> Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Chris Snow - CEng MBCS CITP MBA (Tech Mgmt) (Open) CISSP
>
> Tel: 01453 890660
> Mob: 07944 880950
> Www: www.snowconsulting.co.uk
>
>

Reply via email to