ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Carlow <christian.car...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: The future of OFBiz
Date Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:57:34 GMT
Eh, my fault, I replied to ML which opened the hood.

On 03/05/2014 01:25 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Mmm, where does this discussion come from? I was unable to track it in 
> my own email repository, nor in Markmail or Nabble. Ha I see now, it 
> was previously under the hood. Is there a reason it's now public?
>
> Anyway now that's public, let's try to comment. First let's stick to 
> facts, reading from bottom to top, here is my opinion, on behalf of 
> nobody but myself...
>
> PMC members point
> After a private discussion with Paul (and maybe Pierre but less 
> focused) last week, I updated the PMC page. I even refined those last 
> days, to show that there are actually only 11 "active" committers in 
> the PMC. We could get further on this by looking at the amount of 
> commits for each committer, but I think we should not be so picky, 
> it's not worth it. Even if the situation is not that bad, we have 
> indeed bigger fishes to fry.
>
> @Paul,
> Pierre initially stated
> >>>PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual 
> issues expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant 
> discussion...
> I know it's not your opinion, but please let minilang apart ;)
>
> I appreciate Rupert's comment, because it's quite realistic and 
> pragmatic. We can always rant about OFBiz, and its driving team; but 
> what can we do else? So guys, do you have plans? Elaborate ones?
>
> What do you want to do know? I must be clear at this stage: I'm not 
> for any kind of fork! It might look discouraging seen from outside, 
> but I know very well why I want to continue to work on the "Apache 
> OFBiz" project. The maintained infrastructure (technical, legal, etc.) 
> we benefit at the ASF is not the only element, but is certainly not 
> the least.
>
> This said, I have also rants to express. I must agree that even if we 
> have currently still 11 "active" committers, the reality is much more 
> sparse. At this point, I began to write an ad hominem complaint, but 
> when I think about, it's obvious it's not the tight way. Though, aat 
> some point we will need to slice the meat, I fear...
>
> But we need to have a solid plan. Else persons like Adrian might 
> follow the same way than David did. Adrian already expressed it, and 
> that would not be beneficial for the OFBiz project, at all... So we 
> get back to Ruper's comment, it's all about means, manpower mostly...
>
> Maybe we could first expose the issues we see and what we can do about 
> them, one by one. But we should stay focused on feasibility, else 
> again it will be only words. So it's rather a matter of prioritisation 
> in the real!
>
> Looking forward to all inspiring comments (in other words, please no 
> rants)
>
> Jacques
>
>
> Le 05/03/2014 18:00, Christian Carlow a écrit :
>> I've only been with the project for about a year, but agree activity 
>> seems to have be faded recently. There are a lot of unresolved JIRA 
>> issues reported by me that I haven't had time to reevaluate.
>>
>> Based on a previous posts by contributors such as Adrian Crum about 
>> lack of potential innovation within the community and posts about 
>> other projects such as Moqui, I assume members are exploring other 
>> options or getting discouraged.  Others credited some of the lack of 
>> participation to the projects maturity.  It was also mentioned that 
>> OFBiz might last another 10-15 years and then be replaced by 
>> something like Moqui.
>>
>> I would like to see this project have more activity and am also happy 
>> to discuss its future.
>>
>> On 03/05/2014 10:04 AM, Simon_Maskell@Stannah.co.uk wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I am newer to Ofbiz then everybody else on the list so can only 
>>> comment on what has happened recently(1.5 years), in my short 
>>> experience it feels like there are a few committers actively working 
>>> with Ofbiz and the others don't seem to be adding any real value.
>>>
>>> I guess it depends what the community want from Ofbiz, do we want a 
>>> complete ERP system that looks good and has most of the 
>>> functionality of the commercial products or it is more of a 
>>> framework which requires quite a bit of coding to get it 
>>> working(just my experience may not be everyone's). I would rather 
>>> the first option, we have had to persuade quite a few senior manager 
>>> and director in our business that Ofbiz is the right solutions 
>>> because out the box as it looks old fashioned and doesn't have all 
>>> the features a medium sized company requires.
>>>
>>> I am happy to discuss further as we have banked on Ofbiz being 
>>> around for a while and would want to be involved in shaping its future.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Simon Maskell *
>>>
>>> *Service Delivery Manager*
>>>
>>> *Stannah Management Services Ltd*
>>>
>>> *IT Department*
>>>
>>> *Ext:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 7056
>>>
>>> *DDI:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 01264 341256
>>>
>>> *Fax:*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 01264 341264
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From:  Rupert Howell <ruperthowell@provolve.com>
>>> To:  Paul Piper <pp@ilscipio.com>,
>>> Cc:  Pierre Smits <pierre.smits@orrtiz.com>, Simon Maskell 
>>> <simon_maskell@stannah.co.uk>, Nick Rosser <nrosser@solveda.com>,

>>> Imac <edsays73@hotmail.com>, christian.carlow@gmail.com, 
>>> jadelomeiri@robertheath.co.uk, Andrew Hemp <andrewhemp@provolve.com>
>>> Date:  05/03/2014 15:08
>>> Subject:    Re: The future of OFBiz
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Yes I agree with you both, the project feels stagnant and it feels 
>>> like an 'Old Boys' club at times with features and paradigm changes 
>>> for personal gain being included and prioritised ahead of much 
>>> needed work that would benefit the community. There have been a few 
>>> cases of this recently and they basically came down to one thing - 
>>> the committers and contributors must also support themselves 
>>> financially - so what they are working on for private business 
>>> becomes a priority for them.
>>>
>>> I, like Paul, have grievances with the project but also see the 
>>> benefits that have kept me working with it for such a long period of 
>>> time. Changing the status quo is a tricky thing to do and would take 
>>> alot of time and alot of resource (and therefore money) - as OFBiz 
>>> is perpetually suffering from the lack of these I am definitely 
>>> interested to hear any ideas you may have for the present, but also 
>>> for the future - as in a year's time the committers and contributors 
>>> will still have to support themselves financially.
>>>
>>> I've worked with Jacques before on private contracts and know that 
>>> he will often put community gain ahead of financial so I'm 
>>> definitely keen to hear his opinion.  Pierre, I'm guessing to have 
>>> sent this mail out - and to the subset of the mailing list you have 
>>> sent it to - you have an embryonic idea/plan of the way you would 
>>> like to steer this and I am keen to hear that also. I'd also have 
>>> some suggestions that I would class as critical for the project to 
>>> survive that I could air.
>>>
>>> I have added my colleague Andrew Hemp to the list of CCs.
>>>
>>> All the best.
>>>
>>> Rupert
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5 March 2014 14:06, Paul Piper <_pp@ilscipio.com_ 
>>> <mailto:pp@ilscipio.com>> wrote:
>>> Hi Pierre,
>>>
>>> I share your belief that the current set-up is not beneficial to the 
>>> community. I fear that many of the current problems (few committers, 
>>> slow progress, missing release-plan, focus on specific technologies 
>>> [minilang]) derive on the setup and are blocking progress of an 
>>> otherwise great project and hence I am all in favor of meeting up 
>>> for a conference call.
>>>
>>> I would like to include Jacques to our discussion, however. I think 
>>> he has a long-term, non-financial interest in the community and it 
>>> would be beneficial to hear his perspective as well. Especially, 
>>> since I dont see this as a move against specific members, but 
>>> against a status-quo.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> *Von:* Pierre Smits [mailto:_pierre.smits@orrtiz.com_ 
>>> <mailto:pierre.smits@orrtiz.com>] *
>>> Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 5. März 2014 14:23*
>>> An:* Simon Maskell; Rupert Howell; Nick Rosser; Paul Piper; Imac; 
>>> _christian.carlow@gmail.com_ <mailto:christian.carlow@gmail.com>; 
>>> _jadelomeiri@robertheath.co.uk_ <mailto:jadelomeiri@robertheath.co.uk>*
>>> Betreff:* The future of OFBiz
>>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> How do you feel the project is going? Does it feel to you, like it 
>>> does to me, that is getting a bit stale...
>>>
>>> The list of unresolved issues is growing, even when with patches and 
>>> the activity of PMC members and committers seem to be diminishing. 
>>> And innovation, both community and code wise seems to be stalling.
>>>
>>> Having been part of the OFBiz community for over 5 years now I see 
>>> the decline (like others do) and something needs to be done. This 
>>> project should be a healthy one with an active influx of new 
>>> contributors (every question raised and every answer given also 
>>> qualifies) year on year. And with it effects on the group of 
>>> committers and PMC.
>>>
>>> The list of PMC members currently contains 13 names (see _here_ 
>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Apache+OFBiz+PMC+%28Project+Management+Committee%29+Members+and+Committers>),

>>> of which some have never been active at all in this project (2 - 
>>> probably the initial sponsors when the project was in incubation) 
>>> and several others seem to have withdrawn from the project (although 
>>> still stated otherwise in earlier mentioned list). This list hasn't 
>>> changed much over the lifespan of the project. PMC members seem to 
>>> think that it is a lifetime tenure.
>>>
>>> In fact, currently only 5 are somewhat active and of those 5 active 
>>> members 3 are of the same company (hotwax). Given that the 5 PMC 
>>> members are also the 5 active committers it seems that working in 
>>> the interest of the project (which as the ASF states should be 
>>> 'community over code') isn't happening that much any more. Only 1 is 
>>> actively involved in participating in the community. And the others 
>>> seem to be committed to achieve their own agenda in stead of being 
>>> committed to the project.
>>>
>>> All this is against the wishes of the Apache Foundation.
>>>
>>> Nonetheless, the reports the PMC chair sends in every quarter (see 
>>> _here_ 
>>> <https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Reports>)

>>> doesn't express these concerns. In stead it states that although 
>>> there is decline everything is ok. But no thanks to them I would say.
>>>
>>> Do you feel the same? Unfortunately, given that we all are dispersed 
>>> all over the planet meeting and discuss this and other aspects of 
>>> the project is not an option.
>>>
>>> Would an OFBiz open discussion via a teleconference to discus the 
>>> Future of the project and get to know the other participating in the 
>>> project be an option for you?
>>>
>>> If so, please reply (and state the issues you believe should be 
>>> discussed), and - if there is enough interest - I will set things up 
>>> and communicate through the OFBiz ML.
>>>
>>> PS. Please understand that this is not about getting individual 
>>> issues expedited. However, blockers and critical issues may warrant 
>>> discussion...
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Met vriendelijke groet,
>>>
>>> *Pierre Smits*
>>>
>>> mob. _+31 6 432 45 169_ <tel:%2B31%206%20432%2045%20169>
>>>
>>> Skype: pierresmits_somonar
>>>
>>> *ORRTIZ: BMS*
>>>
>>> Services & Solutions for
>>>
>>> Cloud-Based Manufacturing,
>>>
>>> Professional Services and Retail & Trade
>>>
>>> *_www.orrtiz.com_* <http://www.orrtiz.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Rupert Howell
>>>
>>> Provolve Ltd
>>> Front Office, Deale House, 16 Lavant Street, Petersfield, GU32 3EW, UK
>>>
>>> t: 01730 267868 / m: 079 0968 5308
>>> e: _ruperthowell@provolve.com_ <mailto:ruperthowell@provolve.com>
>>> w: _http://www.provolve.com_ <http://www.provolve.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>> This email is intended only for the above addressee. It may contain 
>>> privileged information. If you are not the addressee you must not 
>>> copy, distribute, disclose or use any of the information in it. If 
>>> you have received it in error, please delete it and notify the sender.
>>>
>>> Stannah Lift Holdings Ltd registered No. 686996, Stannah Management 
>>> Services Ltd registered No. 2483693, Stannah Lift Services Ltd 
>>> registered No. 1189799, Stannah Microlifts Ltd registered No. 
>>> 964804, Stannah Lifts Ltd registered No. 1189836, Stannah Stairlifts 
>>> Ltd registered No. 1401451.
>>>
>>> All registered offices at Watt Close, East Portway, Andover, 
>>> Hampshire, SP10 3SD, England.
>>>
>>> All Registered in England and Wales.
>>>
>>
>>


Mime
View raw message