Thank you, sir, for taking time out of your day to explain a few things. Most of it is penetrating a certain thick skull.
On 14-09-19 11:05 AM, Ted Byers wrote: > Of course Todd. All that you're suggesting is fine, as long as there > is a rational argument for doing it (and in many cases there is - I > just ask that if I involve myself in a project, I know what that > argument is). > > I am not about to develop a new CRM de novo, when there exists > products like SugarCRM. It would be different in only two cases: 1) > the existing products are immature and unreliable and the effort to > make them adequate for use in production is greater than the cost to > start again de movo, and 2) the product is mature and quite usable, > but lacks support for a key, and essential feature, and the > architecture used makes adding support for the missing feature > impracticable. If there is a product that satisfies most of my > requirements, I am most likely to develop new code just to add support > to that product for the features(s) I require that are not already > there. > > Now, commercial entities, with big bucks to invest, may well want to > develop a new entry for a given market, just because they can; but > that is based on a perceived opportunity and a belief they can produce > a better product than those that currently exist and so out-compete > the existing products/providers. But that is a completely different > situation that I have not experienced directly, and am not likely to. > > Cheers > > Ted > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Todd Thorner <[email protected]> wrote: >> Forgive the amateur-speak, but would it be ok to invent an abstracted >> layer of vendor-neutral APIs & service bindings & such forth that >> engenders implementation interest among entities like SugarCRM and its >> competitors? It'd be kind of like what SQL did for the database >> industry, or what CMIS is doing for content management. >> >> How about docker-friendly OFBiz modules & components? That coupled with >> "standards" at the transport/messaging/whatever layer would make OFBiz >> very customizable, at least for *NIX admins. Check out this >> infomercial: >> https://coreos.com/blog/coreos-just-got-easier-to-try-with-panamax/ >> >> In any case, adapt or die. As an Alfresco user, I offer thanks to those >> considering Activiti workflow integration for OFBiz. Now if I could >> only make some progress up the learning curve for this project ... >> >> >> >> On 14-09-19 09:20 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >>>> that purpose. >>>> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the >>>> issues >>>> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >>>> >>> >>> I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to >>> who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am >>> curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they >>> compare. >>> >>> As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were >>> involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have >>> suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, >>> whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of >>> developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for >>> content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz >>> WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content >>> management system. But then, if the available options for particular >>> tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to >>> the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously >>> open source) products while adding code to address perceived >>> deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes >>> good reasons for doing this too). >>> >>> But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the >>> present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that >>> led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable >>> alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in >>> the not too distant future. >>> >>> I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, >>> especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with >>> what is presently in place. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Ted >>> >>>> Rn >>>> >>>> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>>>> >>>>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>>>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>>>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Ted >>>>> >>>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>>>> structure. >>>>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>>>> participate. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ron >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>>>> path? >>>>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ron Wheeler >>>> President >>>> Artifact Software Inc >>>> email: [email protected] >>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler >>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >>>> >>> >>> >>> > > >
