Cool, thanks for the information and for the framework contribution. One thing I do like is Moqui's public domain non-license arrangement with potential users (my opinion is that IP stands for Imaginary Property). If that project wanted to use your type conversion framework (or anything else from the OFBiz project), they would need to include a copy of the Apache License over there too, right?
That would, of course, destroy their vision of having a project unencumbered by any IP legalese. I think I'd rather see them write their own framework from scratch (more duplication of effort of course but that was always their call to make). I'm hoping the ASF will release all projects into the public domain. On 14-03-07 01:58 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: > On 3/7/2014 11:58 AM, Skip wrote: >> I am sure Moqui is a fine framework, but I must agree with Adrian. Yes, >> lets all just abandon hundreds of man-years of work and start from >> scratch. >> I don't know about most of you, but I derive most of my income servicing >> EXISTING Ofbiz derived works. >> >> Specifically, I take issue with the following from Al: >> >> 1. "It is not reasonable to think that we can keep scaling the original >> framework." --- Bullxxxx. Ofbiz (or derivitives) is used by many LARGE >> companies and scaling does not seem to be an issue. Furthermore, >> Ofbiz is >> mostly used by smallish companies where scale is not an issue. > > From a developer's perspective, OFBiz is in some ways more scalable than > Moqui. I'm going to give an arcane example, but I think it illustrates > well why I am not enthusiastic about switching to Moqui. > > Some years ago I introduced a new data type in the OFBiz framework - > TimeDuration. Getting that new data type integrated into the framework > was a huge problem, because there are many places in the framework where > data type conversion is needed, and in all those places there were long > switch statements. Every one of those switch statements needed to be > modified to accommodate the new data type. Worse, not all of the switch > statements were the same - so the existing data type conversion was > inconsistent. > > So, I created a flexible, expandable data conversion framework that > makes it easy to introduce new data types into the project - without the > need to modify the framework code. I replaced all of the switch > statements with calls to the conversion framework. Now users can create > their own data types and add them into the conversion framework easily. > > How does Moqui handle data conversion? Multiple switch statements. So, a > scalability problem that was solved in OFBiz was duplicated in Moqui. > > -Adrian
