ofbiz-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] Change name of birt component
Date Fri, 27 Feb 2015 09:32:05 GMT
In this case I'm more for baby steps. There was already an effort to extract the birt component
from the framework to specialpurpose, it should not be 
thrown to attic.
BTW, note that, depite its names, Birt is not only to be used for Business Intelligence.

Jacques

Le 27/02/2015 10:08, Pierre Smits a écrit :
> Hi Taher,
>
> Indeed, all of those products you mentioned are skeletons. With additions
> that make them into solutions. The bi component could be the core of any
> kind of integration solution, whether that is the birt component or
> external products like jasper or pentaho.
>
> Basically i don't care how it is done. As long as it improves the feature
> set and the adoption of OFBiz. If that means that we chuck current work (in
> both bi and birt) to attic and start over, so be it. But if we can get some
> strides made by enhancing (albeit through small steps) what we have, that's
> ok with me too.
>
> Best 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, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Taher Alkhateeb <
> slidingfilaments@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Pierre,
>>
>> I would call the BI component more of a skeleton than a solution. In fact
>> many things (entities, services, etc ...) in it can be used in BIRT. But
>> you do not have charting, drill-down, styling, event model and many other
>> things that a full blown BI engine can provide (like BIRT, jasper or
>> pentaho).
>>
>> Taher Alkhateeb
>> On Feb 27, 2015 11:22 AM, "Pierre Smits" <pierre.smits@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We have OLAP capabilities in OFBiz: for each tenant a olap repository is
>>> created via the entity-engine. We have cube definitions: dimensions,
>> facts
>>> and star schemas are defined in the bi component.
>>>
>>> I see interest.
>>>
>>> Best 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 Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Ron Wheeler <
>>> rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>> It seems that BIRT is really something like the Framework.
>>>>   - It has some assets and code
>>>>   - These assets and code are used throught the Base Applications and
>>>> SpecialPurpose components whenever you need to display a graphic or
>>>> dashboard, provide an interactive drilldown or want to produce a nice
>>>> report for display or PDF output.
>>>>
>>>> It is not really a separate component.
>>>>
>>>> Guess what! It sounds like a sub-project is the right way to handle
>> this
>>>> so people with the right skillsets can drive the process.
>>>>
>>>> In the meantime, the list of tasks identified by Taher is a very good
>>>> starting point.
>>>> Any idea of the number of manhours required to produce an initial
>> toolkit
>>>> that the application developers could use to integrate Analytics into
>>> each
>>>> component that requires it? How much of this stuff exists buried in
>>>> applications or in customized OFBIz implementation that could be
>>>> contributed.
>>>>
>>>> Does anybody see why this is essential to the competitive position of
>>>> OFBiz or is it just a "nice to have"?
>>>> This goes back to my earlier commens and "marketing" research when
>>> someone
>>>> was looking to get Gartner to look at OFBiz.
>>>> The lack of integrated Analytics would be a big negative in comparison
>>>> with other ERPs.
>>>>
>>>> For building eCommerce websites reporting is not a big deal but if you
>>> are
>>>> going to provide an ERP, the CFO is going to want dashboards, the
>>>> production manager will vote for the system that gives him strong tools
>>> to
>>>> see comparisons and trends in order backlog, production, quality,
>>> manpower
>>>> utilisation, costs, etc.
>>>> The VP HR is going to want graphs on departmental manpower costs,
>>>> overtime, expenses etc. that can be shown to the CFO and CEO at a
>> moments
>>>> notice.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ron
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 26/02/2015 10:21 AM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ron and everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> BIRT is very powerful but by no means easy! I was working for a while
>> on
>>>>> developing an infrastructure for OFBIZ to make it a bit more
>> streamlined
>>>>> across the pages but stopped after a while for two reasons: 1) it was
>>>>> bigger work than I expected and 2) the community seemed uninterested
>> in
>>> the
>>>>> component as you can observe in our discussion in this JIRA for
>> example:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5070
>>>>>
>>>>> To make it reach its potential, there are multiple things to do of
>> which
>>>>> I did some partially:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Create a BIRT library (filename.rptlibrary) which hold references to
>>>>> javascript source files, CSS files, etc .. and it contains all the
>>> assets
>>>>> (logo, fonts, colors, you name it) so that you have a unified look and
>>> feel
>>>>> and unified data preparation scripts for all reports
>>>>> - Create CSS files unifying the look and feel of all reports
>>>>> - Create javascript files that contain scripts for repeating tasks
>>>>> (library imports, UI label preparation, report layout, parameter
>> import
>>> and
>>>>> validation, exception handling etc ...)
>>>>> - Create sub-libraries that handle business intelligence requirements.
>>>>> For example, you can prepare common cubes on the main entities of the
>>>>> system (Party, Product, OrderHeader, Accounting Transaction, etc ...)
>>>>> - Finally, once the above is in place, then you can design a whole
>> heap
>>>>> of reports, OLAP cupes, Charts, you name it!
>>>>>
>>>>> The question remains, is the community interested in adopting BIRT as
>>> its
>>>>> reporting tool? If not, then renaming it would not make much sense
>> given
>>>>> the effort put into fixing all the links to the component and anything
>>> else
>>>>> that might break from the rename.
>>>>>
>>>>> My 2 cents!
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Taher Alkhateeb
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: "Ron Wheeler" <rwheeler@artifact-software.com>
>>>>> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, 26 February, 2015 6:01:09 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Change name of birt component
>>>>>
>>>>> You think that it might be more aspirational than real?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://bod-wiki.birtondemand.com/wiki/index.php?title=App_Mashboard
>> is
>>>>> the kind of thing that I expect OFBiz to support one day.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps a more ambitious name might encourage someone to take an
>>>>> interest in enhancing the capabilities.
>>>>>
>>>>> "BIRT" is just the name of a tool and gives no idea about what
>>>>> functionality is possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Reports" seems to understate what BIRT can do.
>>>>> I am not sure of the work required to enhance the existing interface
>> to
>>>>> produce more of what BIRT can do OOTB but it seems to be something
>>>>> pretty easy
>>>>> http://www.theserverside.com/news/1364376/Using-Eclipse-
>>>>> BIRT-Report-Libraries-and-Templates
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26/02/2015 9:19 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> My main concern is that assigning a generic name (such as "reports"
>> or
>>>>>> "analytics") to a component that is just one very specific way (and
>> in
>>> some
>>>>>> ways limited/questionable for the way the Birt has been integrated)
>> to
>>>>>> implement an integration with a reporting tool may be misleading.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacopo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 26, 2015, at 12:46 AM, Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>   Hi all,
>>>>>>> Currently, all component names describe - in one word - what
the
>>>>>>> components
>>>>>>> are about and what kind of functionality the user - from a business
>>>>>>> point
>>>>>>> of view - can expect. As examples: accounting is related to the
>>> various
>>>>>>> accounting (financial, gl, invoicing, payment, , etc) functions
and
>>>>>>> services, and projectmgr is related to program and project
>> management,
>>>>>>> project task assignment and time registration.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The birt component is a bit the odd one out. The name doesn't
say in
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> one word what it delivers. In stead it is an acronym for a specific
>>>>>>> third
>>>>>>> party integration solution and another open source project with
the
>>> same
>>>>>>> name (birt, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BIRT_Project ).
One
>>> could
>>>>>>> even say it is the name of a tool, not the name of a business
>>>>>>> functionality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In order to be able to increase awareness of the multitude of
>> business
>>>>>>> functionalities (as could be done by using the name of the
>> components)
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> improve adoption, I suggest to change the name (and the references
>> to
>>>>>>> it in
>>>>>>> the component and others) to something that is more to the point
>>>>>>> business
>>>>>>> wise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I propose we rename it to 'reports'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ron Wheeler
>>>> President
>>>> Artifact Software Inc
>>>> email: rwheeler@artifact-software.com
>>>> skype: ronaldmwheeler
>>>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
>>>>
>>>>

Mime
View raw message