I just found out about Moqui, but I refuse to sign up for LinkedIn so I won't be joining that community anytime soon.
Pity party for me, I suppose. Considering how I'm just barely getting on board with the whole "ERP/E-Commerce framework" thing, I'd prefer to start off with the latest up-and-coming technology. I loathe the idea of keeping some legacy system patched together while 99.99% of the business world has moved on to something else. I can remember the whole "Forget about DP and just keep using these Selectrics we all know and love" debate among tech writers 25-odd years ago, as well as the argument about whether RDBMS/SQL was going to make much of an impact on companies with established, proprietary mainframe systems. For that matter, ten or twelve years ago I was a big fan of Struts, although many have since moved on to Springier things (or away from Java altogether). Are differences between the OFBiz and Moqui frameworks quite significant? That's not a question directed toward Mr. Byers specifically, I'm just trying to get a potential business strategy straightened out in my head. Aside: I might as well put in my 0.02 regarding the teleconference that Mr. Smits arranged. Almost all software products both open source and proprietary share a major end user pain point: documentation. All too often, in a bug-ticket kind of way, such pain points go beyond being major to become critical show-stoppers. Oh, and also 0.02 worth of cheerleading for CMIS. If y'all get a chance, take a look at the ASF Chemistry project, it might offer a way to lessen some of this project's code maintenance chores (although I'm in no way qualified to be certain one way or the other). On 14-03-07 08:43 AM, Al Byers wrote: > And BTW, I need to emphasize that I do not think the PMC has been selfish > in their actions. They have added untold value to OFBiz. If I had made the > sacrifices that they have made, I would be hesitant to entertain notions > that would detract from that value. I just happen to think that when looked > at objectively, porting to Moqui would be the best choice in terms of > keeping the project viable. > > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Al Byers <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Adrian, I think that you have summed up the situation in your succinct >> post - there are some service providers who are heavily invested in this >> project and it is their concern for their own interests that is guiding >> OFBiz. Someone new looking at OFBiz should lament the fact that so much >> application value is tied to such old technology. Then they should look at >> Moqui and see how easy it would be to port that value to a new platform - >> at least much easier than creating a new framework - and wonder why it is >> not being done. >> >> I reject the idea that "anyone is interested in building applications on >> Moqui, [...]should do it in the Moqui community". OFBiz does not belong to >> the PMC; it belongs to everybody. I have a dream... sorry, got carried >> away. This seems like a test of the Apache framework - does it provide for >> the long-term life of a project when it conflicts with the self-interests >> of the PMC? >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Adrian Crum < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Switching OFBiz to a different framework has been discussed in the past, >>> and I brought up the subject again in a recent thread on the dev mailing >>> list. At this time, there are some PMC members who are opposed to the idea, >>> so I don't see any hope for switching to Moqui in this project. >>> >>> If anyone is interested in building applications on Moqui, then they >>> should do it in the Moqui community. >>> >>> I don't agree that OFBiz is a sinking ship. There are a number of service >>> providers who are heavily invested in this project, and they are not going >>> to throw that all away for a new one. >>> >>> Adrian Crum >>> Sandglass Software >>> www.sandglass-software.com >>> >>> >>> On 3/7/2014 5:58 AM, Al Byers wrote: >>> >>>> In light of the current discussion about the future of OFBiz I thought it >>>> would be worth revisiting one of my finer moments by reposting this from >>>> David Jones. In today's world 12 technology years is a lifetime. It is >>>> not >>>> reasonable to think that we can keep scaling the original framework. >>>> Another thing to think about is that in order to attract a new group of >>>> users sometimes it takes a big new idea and Moqui fills that role. We >>>> should all keep in mind that OFBiz succeeded secondly because of all the >>>> hard work put in by the community, but firstly because of the brilliant >>>> architecture and foundation provided by David (and Andrew). When that >>>> same >>>> mind applies it to fixing most of OFBiz's problems we should be talking >>>> about how to transition - end of discussion, IMHO. >>>> >>>> I believe that it has been since David wrote this email that he has >>>> integrated Elasticsearch and Drools into Moqui. Those are the kinds of >>>> exciting technologies that OFBiz needs. And it is high time that we >>>> stopped >>>> programming in Java. I have loved the seemless transition to Groovy and I >>>> like having only one scripting language. The future is going to demand >>>> much >>>> more flexibility than OFBiz can deliver. Moqui, with its small core size >>>> and its application of FreeMarker to the frontend provides that >>>> flexibility. >>>> >>>> I don't know exactly how the transition to Moqui should take place, but >>>> that is where the discussion should take place. Anything else, and we are >>>> just discussing how slowly the ship will be sinking. I think David should >>>> remain in control of the core (as I think he would insist), but there >>>> are a >>>> lot of options for porting the mantle and crust portions. I think we >>>> should >>>> think outside the box and look to something like KickStarter to get it >>>> done >>>> quickly. >>>> >>>> -Al >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:26 PM, David E. Jones <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> OFBiz has recently turned 12 years old. At the time it was written many >>>>> more modern libraries either didn't exist or were not usable, including: >>>>> >>>>> - Groovy >>>>> - ehcache >>>>> - Quartz Scheduler >>>>> - Atomikos >>>>> - JackRabbit (and JCR in general) >>>>> - Shiro >>>>> - Camel >>>>> - JSON-RPC, REST, JSON in general >>>>> - ElasticSearch (and to some extent even Lucene) >>>>> - Document and other NoSQL databases (of which ElasticSearch is sort of, >>>>> but I mean CouchDB, MongoDB, Hadoop and derivatives, etc) >>>>> >>>>> Some of these are used, or with some customization usable, in OFBiz. >>>>> Many >>>>> of them overlap a lot with parts of the OFBiz framework, and unlike >>>>> JPA/Hibernate sorts of things, do a better job than what is in OFBiz. >>>>> >>>>> Some big ones are caching, job scheduling, content management, and even >>>>> searching. The OFBiz ProductSearch stuff works well enough (though not >>>>> great) for smaller sets of products, but doesn't compare in flexibility, >>>>> scalability, and speed to ElasticSearch and some other Lucene-based >>>>> alternatives. With some simple framework extensions (like the >>>>> DataDocument, >>>>> DataFeed, and DataSearch features of Moqui) implementing excellent >>>>> search >>>>> for products would be easy, as would search for any other part of the >>>>> system... and all combined in a single system-wide search or segmented >>>>> as >>>>> desired. >>>>> >>>>> Another big one, that has been most painful for me in dealing with >>>>> OFBiz, >>>>> is the lack of consistent scripting and expressions. Once you get used >>>>> to >>>>> the elegance of Groovy dealing with BSH and JUEL is downright painful... >>>>> and for me anyway requires a number of misses before I finally get it >>>>> working. The ${groovy:...} work-around is there, but quirky, and the >>>>> resulting object is unreliable as in some OFBiz XML files it results in >>>>> a >>>>> String while in others it results in the actual Object the expression >>>>> evaluates to. >>>>> >>>>> Even if it is self-serving, I agree that OFBiz was brilliant in its day, >>>>> but it needs FAR more modernization than is currently happening or that >>>>> is >>>>> likely to happen. The new feature velocity in the framework is so slow >>>>> (mostly because of the architecture and existing code, partly because of >>>>> collaboration breakdown reasons), that it can't keep up with >>>>> alternatives. >>>>> >>>>> So yes, OFBiz is great, but it exists in a world that is progressing far >>>>> faster than it can. My reason for starting fresh was just that simple: >>>>> development velocity. >>>>> >>>>> On top of that OFBiz uses certain approaches that are difficult to >>>>> deploy >>>>> and maintain. Try dropping all of OFBiz into a single war file for easy >>>>> upload deployment on the dozens of modern cloud/PaaS services. Try >>>>> adding >>>>> plug-ins that require a proper init/destroy lifecycle instead of >>>>> relying on >>>>> static initialization and no proper tear down. Try finding framework >>>>> functionality in thousands of static methods spread across dozens (or >>>>> hundreds?) of classes. I know these weaknesses of OFBiz well... they >>>>> are my >>>>> mistakes. Correcting them is another matter... and one I didn't find >>>>> possible in the context of the project with the limited time I have >>>>> available. It was faster and easier to start fresh. >>>>> >>>>> When I started OFBiz I was 23 years old and had about 2 years of >>>>> experience in ERP systems. I think it's great that there is enough >>>>> interest >>>>> to keep the project alive and at whatever pace keep it progressing both >>>>> technically and for support of business activities. Still, something >>>>> must >>>>> be done for it to remain competitive with open source and commercial >>>>> alternatives if it is to compete... including with what I've been >>>>> calling >>>>> the "Next Generation" of OFBiz, ie Moqui Framework, Mantle Business >>>>> Artifacts, and the various projects and products built on them. >>>>> >>>>> As good as it is, there is lots of room for improvement and others are >>>>> doing just that. I don't think Al was implying that "OFBiz is no longer >>>>> brilliant", maybe some are overly sensitive to that. The fact is that >>>>> OFBiz >>>>> is what it is, and without major improvements alternatives exceed it in >>>>> so >>>>> many ways. It doesn't make OFBiz less brilliant, but in a sky with other >>>>> bright stars its brilliance is only relevant in context. >>>>> >>>>> OFBiz has lots of momentum, and pretty good marketplace around it, and a >>>>> lot of people are making good money doing work based on it (including >>>>> me). >>>>> Still, I tire frequently of explaining that so many things are known >>>>> issues >>>>> with the project and not easy to correct, but are corrected in the "Next >>>>> Generation", ie Moqui/Mantle. Usually the fix is a hack and workaround >>>>> that >>>>> can't be committed because it breaks other things, just things they >>>>> don't >>>>> intend to use (this still has consequences for bigger projects... things >>>>> all seem to come back around). >>>>> >>>>> So, it is what it is. I understand the motivation to paint OFBiz the >>>>> best >>>>> possible for marketing purposes and such... I personally did that for >>>>> years >>>>> in spite of known flaws. Eventually that only goes so far... OFBiz >>>>> versus >>>>> other open source alternatives has its pluses and minuses, and most in >>>>> the >>>>> community are very aware of those minuses. This causes many to drool >>>>> over >>>>> cleaner, newer solutions like Magento, even if it is based on a totally >>>>> different underlying technology and one that doesn't scale as well or >>>>> interact in enterprise environments as well. >>>>> >>>>> Sooner or later reality catches up... best to stay ahead of it or at >>>>> least >>>>> have long-term plans and alternatives to fall-back on. >>>>> >>>>> -David >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On May 20, 2013, at 11:10 AM, Adrian Crum < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> A quick clarification on this. >>>>>> >>>>>> "OFBiz was brilliant when David created it over ten years ago, but..." >>>>>> >>>>> implies OFBiz is no longer brilliant. OFBiz continues to be just as >>>>> brilliant, with a talented team of developers keeping it current with >>>>> current technology. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -Adrian >>>>>> >>>>>> On 5/20/2013 4:04 PM, Al Byers wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Carlos, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I am just starting to look around for OFBiz work and was intrigued to >>>>>>> >>>>>> see your email there this morning. I have been working with OFBiz for >>>>> over >>>>> 10 years now and am interested in what you have going. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> But I must ask if you have considered Moqui (moqui.org < >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://moqui.org>) - David Jones's successor to OFBiz? I was just at a >>>>> small conference with David and the folks at HowWax Media and based on >>>>> David's comments and what I know about Moqui from my past year of >>>>> working >>>>> with it, if you are starting anew, and especially if you are not using >>>>> the >>>>> current e-commerce features of OFBiz, then you would be well served to >>>>> look >>>>> at Moqui. OFBiz was brilliant when David created it over ten years ago, >>>>> but >>>>> technology has made great advances in that time and if you have the >>>>> freedom >>>>> to do so, it makes sense to start with the latest base. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I have attached David's introduction to Moqui PDF, which I don't think >>>>>>> >>>>>> is readily available off the moqui.org <http://moqui.org> website. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I hope to hear from you soon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Al Byers >>>>>>> 801-400-5111 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 7:19 AM, Carlos Cruz < >>>>>>> [email protected]<mailto: >>>>>>> >>>>>> [email protected]>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi; >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm looking for a Java programmer that is familiar with OFBiz. >>>>>>> Particularly with OFBiz Web Services and OFBiz Entity Engine. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm interested in hosting OFBiz for some very specific industries >>>>>>> and I want to develop some very specific interfaces. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a long term project, I could be flexible with the hours. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If you're interested email me for more details. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also feel free to forward this email to someone you think might be >>>>>>> interested. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks!! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Carlos >>>>>>> >>>>>>> logo-for-social-media-sites-email_signature >>>>>>> >>>>>>> CruzControl Radius >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Your Success Is Our Service >>>>>>> >>>>>>> www.ccradius.com <http://www.ccradius.com> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> email:[email protected] <mailto:email%[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1-877-285-5499 <tel:1-877-285-5499> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >> >
