ofbiz-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Todd Thorner <tthor...@infotinuum.com>
Subject Re: Reposting from David Jones on Moqui
Date Fri, 07 Mar 2014 17:30:06 GMT
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 <byersa@automationgroups.com>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 <
>> adrian.crum@sandglass-software.com> 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 <dejc@me.com> 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
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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
>>>>> 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 <
>>>>> adrian.crum@sandglass-software.com> 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
>>>>>> see your email there this morning. I have been working with OFBiz
>>>>> 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
>>>>>> 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 <
>>>>>>> carlos@nbtbizcapital.com<mailto:
>>>>>> carlos@nbtbizcapital.com>> 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
>>>>>>>     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:carlos@ccradius.com <mailto:email%3Acarlos@ccradius.com>
>>>>>>>     1-877-285-5499 <tel:1-877-285-5499>

View raw message