Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[David E Jones <de...@me.com>]

If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?

All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").

Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.

BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.

-David

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>]

Oups,  addons for to generate the persistance is ufo-java-developed

ofbiz-generators contains only generator engine ;)

Nicolas


Cimballi a écrit :
> Thanks for this information Nicolas, I will look at it !
>   
> Cimballi
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Nicolas Malin
> <ma...@librenberry.net> wrote:
>   
>> Hello, this functionnality already exists on neogia addons project. On your
>> OFBiz instant, you install ofbiz-generators addon and the system generator
>> java class for entitymodel analyse.
>>
>> If you want try, I download addon manager at this address
>> http://addons.neogia.org/addonmanager.tar and deploy in your hot-deploy
>> directory.
>> Run ofbiz  and in admGui install ofbiz-generators
>> After on your ofbiz home run : ant -f generate.xml
>>
>> After that you have some new generate class to do in your javafile :
>>
>> String partyId = party.getPartyId();
>> or
>> String partyId = context.get(Party.partyId);
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>> Cimballi a écrit :
>>     
>>> Hi David !
>>>
>>> As an intermediate user (let's say level 2on 4), to help understand
>>> what kind of user I am, I think it would be very interesting to have
>>> java classes which represents the data model. I don't say one object
>>> per table because maybe it's not the better solution, even if it seems
>>> to be the most logical way to do it. Also, I don't think it's so
>>> important to support another ORM framework, like Hibernate. OFBiz has
>>> its own ORM framework and I am ok with that. The fact about having
>>> java classes is that it would provide an easier way to write code in
>>> an IDE with coe completion, and it would avoid a lot of errors in the
>>> writing of the fields names. It would also provide easy search methods
>>> on fields, for now if you search where you used the field
>>> "description" for an entity X, you can search on the fields name but
>>> can distinghuish on the entity.
>>>
>>> On another side, it would be good to have the ORM framework developed
>>> and packaged separatly from whole OFBiz project, to be able to easily
>>> reuse it in other projects. It could be a big boost for the ORM
>>> framework as more developers would be able to use it.
>>>
>>> That's my opinion, and thanks for readind it ! ;-)
>>>
>>> Cimballi
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:19 AM, David E Jones <de...@me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the
>>>> Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>
>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used
>>>> instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like
>>>> "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of
>>>> just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>
>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true
>>>> that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on
>>>> further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but
>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing.
>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual
>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would
>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming
>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI
>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss
>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> --
>> Nicolas MALIN
>> Consultant
>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>> -------
>> Société LibrenBerry
>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>   


-- 
Nicolas MALIN
Consultant
Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
-------
Société LibrenBerry
Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
Site : http://www.librenberry.net/

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Cimballi <ci...@gmail.com>]

Thanks for this information Nicolas, I will look at it !

Cimballi

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Nicolas Malin
<ma...@librenberry.net> wrote:
> Hello, this functionnality already exists on neogia addons project. On your
> OFBiz instant, you install ofbiz-generators addon and the system generator
> java class for entitymodel analyse.
>
> If you want try, I download addon manager at this address
> http://addons.neogia.org/addonmanager.tar and deploy in your hot-deploy
> directory.
> Run ofbiz  and in admGui install ofbiz-generators
> After on your ofbiz home run : ant -f generate.xml
>
> After that you have some new generate class to do in your javafile :
>
> String partyId = party.getPartyId();
> or
> String partyId = context.get(Party.partyId);
>
> Nicolas
>
> Cimballi a écrit :
>>
>> Hi David !
>>
>> As an intermediate user (let's say level 2on 4), to help understand
>> what kind of user I am, I think it would be very interesting to have
>> java classes which represents the data model. I don't say one object
>> per table because maybe it's not the better solution, even if it seems
>> to be the most logical way to do it. Also, I don't think it's so
>> important to support another ORM framework, like Hibernate. OFBiz has
>> its own ORM framework and I am ok with that. The fact about having
>> java classes is that it would provide an easier way to write code in
>> an IDE with coe completion, and it would avoid a lot of errors in the
>> writing of the fields names. It would also provide easy search methods
>> on fields, for now if you search where you used the field
>> "description" for an entity X, you can search on the fields name but
>> can distinghuish on the entity.
>>
>> On another side, it would be good to have the ORM framework developed
>> and packaged separatly from whole OFBiz project, to be able to easily
>> reuse it in other projects. It could be a big boost for the ORM
>> framework as more developers would be able to use it.
>>
>> That's my opinion, and thanks for readind it ! ;-)
>>
>> Cimballi
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:19 AM, David E Jones <de...@me.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the
>>> Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used
>>> instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like
>>> "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of
>>> just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true
>>> that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on
>>> further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but
>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing.
>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual
>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would
>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming
>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI
>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss
>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Nicolas MALIN
> Consultant
> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
> -------
> Société LibrenBerry
> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>
>



-- 
Cimballi
JAVA J2EE Freelance
http://cimballi.elance.com/

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>]

Hello, this functionnality already exists on neogia addons project. On 
your OFBiz instant, you install ofbiz-generators addon and the system 
generator java class for entitymodel analyse.

If you want try, I download addon manager at this address 
http://addons.neogia.org/addonmanager.tar and deploy in your hot-deploy 
directory.
Run ofbiz  and in admGui install ofbiz-generators
After on your ofbiz home run : ant -f generate.xml

After that you have some new generate class to do in your javafile :

String partyId = party.getPartyId();
or
String partyId = context.get(Party.partyId);

Nicolas

Cimballi a écrit :
> Hi David !
>
> As an intermediate user (let's say level 2on 4), to help understand
> what kind of user I am, I think it would be very interesting to have
> java classes which represents the data model. I don't say one object
> per table because maybe it's not the better solution, even if it seems
> to be the most logical way to do it. Also, I don't think it's so
> important to support another ORM framework, like Hibernate. OFBiz has
> its own ORM framework and I am ok with that. The fact about having
> java classes is that it would provide an easier way to write code in
> an IDE with coe completion, and it would avoid a lot of errors in the
> writing of the fields names. It would also provide easy search methods
> on fields, for now if you search where you used the field
> "description" for an entity X, you can search on the fields name but
> can distinghuish on the entity.
>
> On another side, it would be good to have the ORM framework developed
> and packaged separatly from whole OFBiz project, to be able to easily
> reuse it in other projects. It could be a big boost for the ORM
> framework as more developers would be able to use it.
>
> That's my opinion, and thanks for readind it ! ;-)
>
> Cimballi
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:19 AM, David E Jones <de...@me.com> wrote:
>   
>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>
>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>
>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>
>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>   


-- 
Nicolas MALIN
Consultant
Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
-------
Société LibrenBerry
Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
Site : http://www.librenberry.net/

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Cimballi <ci...@gmail.com>]

Hi David !

As an intermediate user (let's say level 2on 4), to help understand
what kind of user I am, I think it would be very interesting to have
java classes which represents the data model. I don't say one object
per table because maybe it's not the better solution, even if it seems
to be the most logical way to do it. Also, I don't think it's so
important to support another ORM framework, like Hibernate. OFBiz has
its own ORM framework and I am ok with that. The fact about having
java classes is that it would provide an easier way to write code in
an IDE with coe completion, and it would avoid a lot of errors in the
writing of the fields names. It would also provide easy search methods
on fields, for now if you search where you used the field
"description" for an entity X, you can search on the fields name but
can distinghuish on the entity.

On another side, it would be good to have the ORM framework developed
and packaged separatly from whole OFBiz project, to be able to easily
reuse it in other projects. It could be a big boost for the ORM
framework as more developers would be able to use it.

That's my opinion, and thanks for readind it ! ;-)

Cimballi


On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 2:19 AM, David E Jones <de...@me.com> wrote:
>
> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>
> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>
> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>
> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>
> -David
>
>



-- 
Cimballi
JAVA J2EE Freelance
http://cimballi.elance.com/

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

["huang.miles@gmail.com" <hu...@gmail.com>]

While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
etc, though? Are they all wrong?

In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
OFBIZ already will use it. 

On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
"home made" every thing, isn't it?

Regards,
Miles.

On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> Hi David:
> 
> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many 
> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value 
> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
> 
> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
> 
>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>       the Entity Engine.
>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>       existing tools).
>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>       tools).
> 
> More to come...
> Ruth
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
> 
> David E Jones wrote:
> > If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
> >
> > All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
> >
> > Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
> >
> > BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> >   

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>]

+1 - another thing to add to this list would be the ability to roll back an upgrade or data load so that if issues are found that we can get back, in the system, directly to where we started.  Normally we do this with a staging upgrade first and a db backup second, but having something like this in the system has been requested a few times, so I thought I'd mention it.

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:23 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:

> Hi David:
> 
> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
> 
> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
> 
>   * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>     Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>   * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>     the Entity Engine.
>   * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>     existing tools).
>   * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>     tools).
> 
> More to come...
> Ruth
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
> 
> David E Jones wrote:
>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>> 
>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>> 
>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>> 
>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>> 
>> -David
>> 
>> 
>>  

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>]

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-3556

if anyone once to help.

=========================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


Tim Ruppert sent the following on 3/11/2010 7:27 AM:
> +1 - another thing to add to this list would be the ability to roll back an upgrade or data load so that if issues are found that we can get back, in the system, directly to where we started.  Normally we do this with a staging upgrade first and a db backup second, but having something like this in the system has been requested a few times, so I thought I'd mention it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
> 
> On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:23 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> 
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>
>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>
>>   * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>     Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>   * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>     the Entity Engine.
>>   * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>     existing tools).
>>   * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>     tools).
>>
>> More to come...
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>  
> 
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Adrian Crum <ad...@yahoo.com>]

I believe the possibilities of discussion could advance if you could provide a small example of how data is accessed currently versus how the same data would be accessed with SDO.

-Adrian

--- On Fri, 3/12/10, Rodrigo Lima <ac...@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Rodrigo Lima <ac...@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier
> To: user@ofbiz.apache.org
> Date: Friday, March 12, 2010, 6:55 PM
> I believe that without further
> research on SDO, XQuery and XPath, we're
> unable to advance the possibilities and discussion.
> The data layer (not just DB) must be divided into the
> minimum degree 2
> responsibilities.
> Were they:
> 1) Physical Data
> 2) Logical Data
> 
> This concept is called a Data Services Layer.
> Please, this is not WEB Service.
> 
> I do not look like the owner of the truth, however, I see
> that there are
> many gains have this layer as an asset beyond the Entity
> Manager.
> 
> 
> 2010/3/12 Ruth Hoffman <rh...@aesolves.com>
> 
> > Hi Rodrigo:
> > I'm really not understanding your arguments. Could you
> elaborate?
> >
> >
> > Rodrigo Lima wrote:
> >
> >> David,
> >>
> >> SDO is intended to give applications an
> easy-to-use, uniform programming
> >> model for accessing and updating data, regardless
> of the underlying source
> >> or format of the data.
> >>
> >>
> > Isn't that what the Entity Engine does? What am I
> missing here?
> >
> >  The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client
> applications to read and
> >> update the data through a typed or untyped
> interface.
> >> However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the
> core of each data
> >> service
> >> is an XML data type.
> >>
> >>
> > I don't understand, Web services are all about XML
> data types.
> >
> >  The network is accessed again only when the
> client wants to apply the data
> >> changes to the source.
> >>
> >>
> > What does SDO have to do with network access? Isn't
> this just keeping stuff
> > in memory (caching ) vs. writing to persistent
> storage?
> >
> >  Disconnected data access contributes to a
> scalable, efficient computing
> >> environment because back-end system resources are
> never tied up for very
> >> long.
> >>
> >>
> > In real life, I found the opposite to be true.
> Enterprises spend more time
> > and effort synchronizing their back-end data resources
> then they do using
> > them. Performance, reliability and usability always
> suffer. This is the
> > age-old argument of centralized vs decentralized
> computing. Maybe I don't
> > understand what you are trying to say here?
> >
> >  I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with
> XQuery and XPath
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2010/3/12 David E Jones <de...@me.com>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems
> to be more related to the
> >>> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity
> engine. I might be
> >>> misunderstanding that though...
> >>>
> >>> Whatever the case, what is it that you like
> about SDO, or how does it
> >>> make
> >>> your life easier?
> >>>
> >>> -David
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Hi David,
> >>>>
> >>>> I believe it is worth following in a path
> parallel to the Entity Engine,
> >>>> which already has its
> >>>> value and trust already established.
> >>>> A model that looks interesting data model
> would be to create a layer as
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> SDO (Service Data Objects
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> to
> >>>> services layer, which could easily be used
> by various technologies UI
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Tier.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> A great detail is the question of objects
> typed and untyped.
> >>>>
> >>>> Some might say that this issue is easily
> solved with Web Services,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> however,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> in practice, it is not so simple for many
> platforms.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Rodrigo
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> -1
> >>>>>
> >>>>> BJ, Ruth,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the
> same way that other projects is a
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> bit
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully
> understand OFBiz and the entity
> >>>>> engine.
> >>>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on
> OFBiz, and I have made the same error
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> at
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt
> understood at the moment the beauty of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> entityengine.
> >>>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm
> glad having done this error, and now
> >>>>> more than mastering the entity engine,
> and all its abilities in tems of
> >>>>> connections, abstractions, and more.
> >>>>> The only fault I found was on huge
> customers projects where there were
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> big
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> business needs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then
> added generators to fill the
> >>>>> gap,
> >>>>> and this remove nothing from the
> entity-engine capabilities, but add
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> more
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> smoothness in its use. The combination
> form/screen/minilang is as strong
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> as
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> before and more stronger. For big business
> needs, where java is needed,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> the
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> generated code is more reliable (who never
> has made on error on Strings
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> ?).
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> for an example, you can take a look to
> neogia accounting code, to see
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> how
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> entity-engine and code generation
> combination is valuable.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From our side, it is sure that helping
> development by generation is not
> >>>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not
> do it, noone told to replace
> >>>>> entity-engine with hibernate.
> >>>>> Generation is adding a bigger
> flexibility and a more reliable product.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more
> than just an ERP. It is also a
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> strong
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> base for any project, from the small ones
> to the big ones. Adding MDA
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> tools
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> in its data model can only be a good
> thing.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Nicolas
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Thank you BJ.
> >>>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> "myofbiz"
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these
> other approaches are better why is
> >>>>>>> there
> >>>>>>> not a application like ofbiz
> done in them, without using ofbiz at
> >>>>>>> all?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I keep getting the feeling
> that those that want major changes don't
> >>>>>>> really understand the design
> goals of ofbiz.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> =======================
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BJ Freeman
> >>>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> >>>>>>> Strategic Power Office with
> Supplier Automation <
> >>>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> >>>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to
> Assist
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Chat  Y! messenger:
> bjfr33man
> >>>>>>> Linkedin
> >>>>>>> <
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com
> sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> While reading the sentence
> "There are many people out there who
> >>>>>>>> don't
> >>>>>>>> understand the Entity
> Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> absolutely much more people "out there",
> and I'm sure the OFBIZ
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> project
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on
> asking "Hibernate",
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Spring",
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ
> framework DID do a right thing - to provide
> >>>>>>>> developers an integrated
> framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
> >>>>>>>> developer can define
> entity in one place and share the entity
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> definition
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> across different tiers, form persistence
> to presentation. This kind
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> of
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> integration saved developers a lot from
> typings and preserved
> >>>>>>>> consistency across
> different application tiers. But, this is not
> >>>>>>>> what
> >>>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can
> provide. All gains come from the
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> integration.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity
> engine into a stand alone ORM
> >>>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not
> very attractive and only people familiar
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> with
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
> >>>>>>>> On the other hand, if
> there are another framework such as Grails
> >>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>> can provide at least same
> level of cross tier integration ability,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> while
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN
> technologies (such as
> >>>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM,
> Spring for service tier component
> >>>>>>>> composition,
> >>>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier
> framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> than
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>> Miles.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at
> 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi David:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this
> is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> many
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> people out there who don't understand the
> Entity Engine value
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> proposition.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> That is why they keep asking for
> "Hibernate" etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd
> consider as additions:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>  * Maybe making a
> separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
> >>>>>>>>>    Engine.
> Take it out of WebTools.
> >>>>>>>>>  * Include in
> that webapp any security/role management specific to
> >>>>>>>>>    the
> Entity Engine.
> >>>>>>>>>  * Entity Engine
> performance tools (or more information on how to
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> use
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>    existing tools).
> >>>>>>>>>  * Better backup
> tools (or more information on how to use existing
> >>>>>>>>>    tools).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> More to come...
> >>>>>>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>>>>>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at
> http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> >>>>>>>>> "myofbiz"
> >>>>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> If you could
> change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (basically
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> the Entity Engine), what would you
> change?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> All comments are
> welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> see
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please
> describe what you like
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> about it
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for
> each table in my database")
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> instead
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's
> use Hibernate!").
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Why am I asking?
> This topic comes up every once in a while, and
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> it's
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> true that many suggestions never get
> enough support to actually
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> happen (or
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> on further research it is decided that the
> idea is not tenable),
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> but
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in
> the open is still a great
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> thing.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things
> like this where users and
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> more casual
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> contributors had ideas and saw
> possibilities that others, even more
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> involved
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> contributors, totally missed or never
> looked at that way. What I
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> think would
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to
> keep this mostly to
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> brainstorming
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want
> to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> UI
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> tiers) please use the other threads on
> those. If you'd like to
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> discuss
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look
> for the "General"
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> thread.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> -David
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>> Nicolas MALIN
> >>>>> Consultant
> >>>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
> >>>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
> >>>>> -------
> >>>>> Société LibrenBerry
> >>>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
> >>>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 


      

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Rodrigo Lima <ac...@gmail.com>]

I believe that without further research on SDO, XQuery and XPath, we're
unable to advance the possibilities and discussion.
The data layer (not just DB) must be divided into the minimum degree 2
responsibilities.
Were they:
1) Physical Data
2) Logical Data

This concept is called a Data Services Layer.
Please, this is not WEB Service.

I do not look like the owner of the truth, however, I see that there are
many gains have this layer as an asset beyond the Entity Manager.


2010/3/12 Ruth Hoffman <rh...@aesolves.com>

> Hi Rodrigo:
> I'm really not understanding your arguments. Could you elaborate?
>
>
> Rodrigo Lima wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> SDO is intended to give applications an easy-to-use, uniform programming
>> model for accessing and updating data, regardless of the underlying source
>> or format of the data.
>>
>>
> Isn't that what the Entity Engine does? What am I missing here?
>
>  The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client applications to read and
>> update the data through a typed or untyped interface.
>> However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the core of each data
>> service
>> is an XML data type.
>>
>>
> I don't understand, Web services are all about XML data types.
>
>  The network is accessed again only when the client wants to apply the data
>> changes to the source.
>>
>>
> What does SDO have to do with network access? Isn't this just keeping stuff
> in memory (caching ) vs. writing to persistent storage?
>
>  Disconnected data access contributes to a scalable, efficient computing
>> environment because back-end system resources are never tied up for very
>> long.
>>
>>
> In real life, I found the opposite to be true. Enterprises spend more time
> and effort synchronizing their back-end data resources then they do using
> them. Performance, reliability and usability always suffer. This is the
> age-old argument of centralized vs decentralized computing. Maybe I don't
> understand what you are trying to say here?
>
>  I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with XQuery and XPath
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/3/12 David E Jones <de...@me.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems to be more related to the
>>> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity engine. I might be
>>> misunderstanding that though...
>>>
>>> Whatever the case, what is it that you like about SDO, or how does it
>>> make
>>> your life easier?
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi David,
>>>>
>>>> I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine,
>>>> which already has its
>>>> value and trust already established.
>>>> A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as
>>>>
>>>>
>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> SDO (Service Data Objects
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
>>>
>>>
>>>> to
>>>> services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Tier.
>>>
>>>
>>>> A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped.
>>>>
>>>> Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services,
>>>>
>>>>
>>> however,
>>>
>>>
>>>> in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Rodrigo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -1
>>>>>
>>>>> BJ, Ruth,
>>>>>
>>>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> bit
>>>
>>>
>>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity
>>>>> engine.
>>>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> at
>>>
>>>
>>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> entityengine.
>>>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
>>>>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
>>>>> connections, abstractions, and more.
>>>>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> big
>>>
>>>
>>>> business needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the
>>>>> gap,
>>>>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> more
>>>
>>>
>>>> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> as
>>>
>>>
>>>> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> the
>>>
>>>
>>>> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ?).
>>>
>>>
>>>> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> how
>>>
>>>
>>>> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>>>>>
>>>>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
>>>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
>>>>> entity-engine with hibernate.
>>>>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>>>>
>>>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> strong
>>>
>>>
>>>> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> tools
>>>
>>>
>>>> in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>
>>>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thank you BJ.
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>
>>>
>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is
>>>>>>> there
>>>>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at
>>>>>>> all?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <
>>>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>>>>> Linkedin
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who
>>>>>>>> don't
>>>>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> are
>>>
>>>
>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> project
>>>
>>>
>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate",
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Spring",
>>>
>>>
>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> definition
>>>
>>>
>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> of
>>>
>>>
>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not
>>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> integration.
>>>
>>>
>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> with
>>>
>>>
>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> while
>>>
>>>
>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component
>>>>>>>> composition,
>>>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> than
>>>
>>>
>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> many
>>>
>>>
>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> proposition.
>>>
>>>
>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>>>>>    Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>>>>>  * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>>>>>    the Entity Engine.
>>>>>>>>>  * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> use
>>>
>>>
>>>>    existing tools).
>>>>>>>>>  * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>>>>>    tools).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (basically
>>>
>>>
>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> see
>>>
>>>
>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> about it
>>>
>>>
>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database")
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> instead
>>>
>>>
>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>
>>>
>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> happen (or
>>>
>>>
>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable),
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> but
>>>
>>>
>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thing.
>>>
>>>
>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> more casual
>>>
>>>
>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> involved
>>>
>>>
>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> think would
>>>
>>>
>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> brainstorming
>>>
>>>
>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> UI
>>>
>>>
>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> discuss
>>>
>>>
>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General"
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> thread.
>>>
>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> Nicolas MALIN
>>>>> Consultant
>>>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>>>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>>>>> -------
>>>>> Société LibrenBerry
>>>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>>>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Ruth Hoffman <rh...@aesolves.com>]

Hi Rodrigo:
I'm really not understanding your arguments. Could you elaborate?

Rodrigo Lima wrote:
> David,
>
> SDO is intended to give applications an easy-to-use, uniform programming
> model for accessing and updating data, regardless of the underlying source
> or format of the data.
>   
Isn't that what the Entity Engine does? What am I missing here?
> The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client applications to read and
> update the data through a typed or untyped interface.
> However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the core of each data service
> is an XML data type.
>   
I don't understand, Web services are all about XML data types.
> The network is accessed again only when the client wants to apply the data
> changes to the source.
>   
What does SDO have to do with network access? Isn't this just keeping 
stuff in memory (caching ) vs. writing to persistent storage?
> Disconnected data access contributes to a scalable, efficient computing
> environment because back-end system resources are never tied up for very
> long.
>   
In real life, I found the opposite to be true. Enterprises spend more 
time and effort synchronizing their back-end data resources then they do 
using them. Performance, reliability and usability always suffer. This 
is the age-old argument of centralized vs decentralized computing. Maybe 
I don't understand what you are trying to say here?
> I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with XQuery and XPath
>
>
>
>
>
> 2010/3/12 David E Jones <de...@me.com>
>
>   
>> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems to be more related to the
>> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity engine. I might be
>> misunderstanding that though...
>>
>> Whatever the case, what is it that you like about SDO, or how does it make
>> your life easier?
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine,
>>> which already has its
>>> value and trust already established.
>>> A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as
>>>       
>> the
>>     
>>> SDO (Service Data Objects
>>>       
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
>>     
>>> to
>>> services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI
>>>       
>> Tier.
>>     
>>> A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped.
>>>
>>> Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services,
>>>       
>> however,
>>     
>>> in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Rodrigo
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> -1
>>>>
>>>> BJ, Ruth,
>>>>
>>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
>>>>         
>> bit
>>     
>>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity
>>>> engine.
>>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
>>>>         
>> at
>>     
>>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of
>>>>         
>> the
>>     
>>>> entityengine.
>>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
>>>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
>>>> connections, abstractions, and more.
>>>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
>>>>         
>> big
>>     
>>>> business needs.
>>>>
>>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
>>>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
>>>>         
>> more
>>     
>>>> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong
>>>>         
>> as
>>     
>>>> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed,
>>>>         
>> the
>>     
>>>> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings
>>>>         
>> ?).
>>     
>>>> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see
>>>>         
>> how
>>     
>>>> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>>>>
>>>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
>>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
>>>> entity-engine with hibernate.
>>>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>>>
>>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
>>>>         
>> strong
>>     
>>>> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA
>>>>         
>> tools
>>     
>>>> in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Nicolas
>>>>
>>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>         
>>>>> Thank you BJ.
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>           
>> "myofbiz"
>>     
>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <
>>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>>>> Linkedin
>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
>>     
>>>>>>
>>>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>>>>>>>               
>> are
>>     
>>>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ
>>>>>>>               
>> project
>>     
>>>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate",
>>>>>>>               
>> "Spring",
>>     
>>>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>>>>>>>               
>> definition
>>     
>>>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind
>>>>>>>               
>> of
>>     
>>>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the
>>>>>>>               
>> integration.
>>     
>>>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar
>>>>>>>               
>> with
>>     
>>>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>>>>>>>               
>> while
>>     
>>>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>>>>>>>               
>> than
>>     
>>>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>>>>>>>>                 
>> many
>>     
>>>>>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>>>>>>                 
>> proposition.
>>     
>>>>>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>   * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>>>>     Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>>>>   * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>>>>     the Entity Engine.
>>>>>>>>   * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to
>>>>>>>>                 
>> use
>>     
>>>>>>>>     existing tools).
>>>>>>>>   * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>>>>     tools).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>                 
>>>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> (basically
>>     
>>>>>>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> see
>>     
>>>>>>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> about it
>>     
>>>>>>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database")
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> instead
>>     
>>>>>>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> it's
>>     
>>>>>>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> happen (or
>>     
>>>>>>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable),
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> but
>>     
>>>>>>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> thing.
>>     
>>>>>>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> more casual
>>     
>>>>>>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> involved
>>     
>>>>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> think would
>>     
>>>>>>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> brainstorming
>>     
>>>>>>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> UI
>>     
>>>>>>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> discuss
>>     
>>>>>>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General"
>>>>>>>>>                   
>> thread.
>>     
>>>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>                   
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             
>>>> --
>>>> Nicolas MALIN
>>>> Consultant
>>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>>>> -------
>>>> Société LibrenBerry
>>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>     
>
>   

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[David E Jones <de...@me.com>]

That's a great overview of what SDO is, kind of like what I've seen in other places.

I'm still wondering though:

1. How does it make your life easier?

2. What would you do with it?

3. What have you run into that was a pain that SDO would make easier?

I guess what I'm getting at is the problem that this would solve. There are tons of solutions out there looking for problems, and I'm not saying that this is one, but in order to really consider this it would be helpful to know what the problem is that it solves or what are your requirements that this fills?

-David


On Mar 11, 2010, at 9:49 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote:

> David,
> 
> SDO is intended to give applications an easy-to-use, uniform programming
> model for accessing and updating data, regardless of the underlying source
> or format of the data.
> The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client applications to read and
> update the data through a typed or untyped interface.
> However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the core of each data service
> is an XML data type.
> The network is accessed again only when the client wants to apply the data
> changes to the source.
> Disconnected data access contributes to a scalable, efficient computing
> environment because back-end system resources are never tied up for very
> long.
> I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with XQuery and XPath
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2010/3/12 David E Jones <de...@me.com>
> 
>> 
>> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems to be more related to the
>> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity engine. I might be
>> misunderstanding that though...
>> 
>> Whatever the case, what is it that you like about SDO, or how does it make
>> your life easier?
>> 
>> -David
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi David,
>>> 
>>> I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine,
>>> which already has its
>>> value and trust already established.
>>> A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as
>> the
>>> SDO (Service Data Objects
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
>>> to
>>> services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI
>> Tier.
>>> 
>>> A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped.
>>> 
>>> Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services,
>> however,
>>> in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Rodrigo
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>
>>> 
>>>> -1
>>>> 
>>>> BJ, Ruth,
>>>> 
>>>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
>> bit
>>>> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity
>>>> engine.
>>>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
>> at
>>>> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of
>> the
>>>> entityengine.
>>>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
>>>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
>>>> connections, abstractions, and more.
>>>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
>> big
>>>> business needs.
>>>> 
>>>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
>>>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
>> more
>>>> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong
>> as
>>>> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed,
>> the
>>>> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings
>> ?).
>>>> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see
>> how
>>>> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>>>> 
>>>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
>>>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
>>>> entity-engine with hibernate.
>>>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>>> 
>>>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
>> strong
>>>> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA
>> tools
>>>> in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Nicolas
>>>> 
>>>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>>> 
>>>> +1
>>>>> Thank you BJ.
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>> "myofbiz"
>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> =======================
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <
>>>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>>>> Linkedin
>>>>>> <
>>>>>> 
>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>> are
>>>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ
>> project
>>>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate",
>> "Spring",
>>>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>> definition
>>>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind
>> of
>>>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the
>> integration.
>>>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar
>> with
>>>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>> while
>>>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>> than
>>>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>> many
>>>>>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>> proposition.
>>>>>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>>>>    Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>>>>  * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>>>>    the Entity Engine.
>>>>>>>>  * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to
>> use
>>>>>>>>    existing tools).
>>>>>>>>  * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>>>>    tools).
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>> (basically
>>>>>>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>> see
>>>>>>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like
>> about it
>>>>>>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database")
>> instead
>>>>>>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>> it's
>>>>>>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually
>> happen (or
>>>>>>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable),
>> but
>>>>>>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great
>> thing.
>>>>>>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and
>> more casual
>>>>>>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more
>> involved
>>>>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>> think would
>>>>>>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to
>> brainstorming
>>>>>>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>> UI
>>>>>>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>> discuss
>>>>>>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General"
>> thread.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Nicolas MALIN
>>>> Consultant
>>>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>>>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>>>> -------
>>>> Société LibrenBerry
>>>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>>>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Rodrigo Lima <ac...@gmail.com>]

David,

SDO is intended to give applications an easy-to-use, uniform programming
model for accessing and updating data, regardless of the underlying source
or format of the data.
The Service Data Objects (SDO) API allows client applications to read and
update the data through a typed or untyped interface.
However, unlike a conventional Web service, at the core of each data service
is an XML data type.
The network is accessed again only when the client wants to apply the data
changes to the source.
Disconnected data access contributes to a scalable, efficient computing
environment because back-end system resources are never tied up for very
long.
I suggest also apply the concept of SDO with XQuery and XPath





2010/3/12 David E Jones <de...@me.com>

>
> The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems to be more related to the
> service engine in OFBiz than to the entity engine. I might be
> misunderstanding that though...
>
> Whatever the case, what is it that you like about SDO, or how does it make
> your life easier?
>
> -David
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote:
>
> > Hi David,
> >
> > I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine,
> > which already has its
> > value and trust already established.
> > A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as
> the
> > SDO (Service Data Objects
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
> > to
> > services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI
> Tier.
> >
> > A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped.
> >
> > Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services,
> however,
> > in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Rodrigo
> >
> >
> > 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>
> >
> >> -1
> >>
> >> BJ, Ruth,
> >>
> >> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
> bit
> >> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity
> >> engine.
> >> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
> at
> >> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of
> the
> >> entityengine.
> >> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
> >> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
> >> connections, abstractions, and more.
> >> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
> big
> >> business needs.
> >>
> >> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
> >> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
> more
> >> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong
> as
> >> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed,
> the
> >> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings
> ?).
> >> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see
> how
> >> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
> >>
> >> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
> >> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
> >> entity-engine with hibernate.
> >> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
> >>
> >> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
> strong
> >> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA
> tools
> >> in its data model can only be a good thing.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Nicolas
> >>
> >> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
> >>
> >> +1
> >>> Thank you BJ.
> >>> Ruth
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> "myofbiz"
> >>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
> >>>
> >>> BJ Freeman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
> >>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
> >>>>
> >>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
> >>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
> >>>>
> >>>> =======================
> >>>>
> >>>> BJ Freeman
> >>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> >>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <
> >>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> >>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
> >>>>
> >>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
> >>>>
> >>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> >>>> Linkedin
> >>>> <
> >>>>
> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
> >>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
> are
> >>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ
> project
> >>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate",
> "Spring",
> >>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
> >>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
> >>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
> definition
> >>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind
> of
> >>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
> >>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
> >>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the
> integration.
> >>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
> >>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar
> with
> >>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
> >>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
> >>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
> while
> >>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
> >>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
> >>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
> than
> >>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Miles.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi David:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
> many
> >>>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
> proposition.
> >>>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>   * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
> >>>>>>     Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
> >>>>>>   * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
> >>>>>>     the Entity Engine.
> >>>>>>   * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to
> use
> >>>>>>     existing tools).
> >>>>>>   * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
> >>>>>>     tools).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> More to come...
> >>>>>> Ruth
> >>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
> >>>>>> "myofbiz"
> >>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
> (basically
> >>>>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
> see
> >>>>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like
> about it
> >>>>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database")
> instead
> >>>>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
> it's
> >>>>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually
> happen (or
> >>>>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable),
> but
> >>>>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great
> thing.
> >>>>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and
> more casual
> >>>>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more
> involved
> >>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
> think would
> >>>>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to
> brainstorming
> >>>>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
> UI
> >>>>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
> discuss
> >>>>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General"
> thread.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -David
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Nicolas MALIN
> >> Consultant
> >> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
> >> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
> >> -------
> >> Société LibrenBerry
> >> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
> >> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[David E Jones <de...@me.com>]

The SDO stuff (that was originally WDO) seems to be more related to the service engine in OFBiz than to the entity engine. I might be misunderstanding that though...

Whatever the case, what is it that you like about SDO, or how does it make your life easier?

-David


On Mar 11, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Rodrigo Lima wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine,
> which already has its
> value and trust already established.
> A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as the
> SDO (Service Data Objects http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
> to
> services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI Tier.
> 
> A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped.
> 
> Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services, however,
> in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Rodrigo
> 
> 
> 2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>
> 
>> -1
>> 
>> BJ, Ruth,
>> 
>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a bit
>> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity
>> engine.
>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error at
>> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of the
>> entityengine.
>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
>> connections, abstractions, and more.
>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were big
>> business needs.
>> 
>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add more
>> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong as
>> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed, the
>> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings ?).
>> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see how
>> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>> 
>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
>> entity-engine with hibernate.
>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>> 
>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a strong
>> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA tools
>> in its data model can only be a good thing.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Nicolas
>> 
>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>> 
>> +1
>>> Thank you BJ.
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>> 
>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>> 
>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>> 
>>>> =======================
>>>> 
>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <
>>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>> 
>>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>> Linkedin
>>>> <
>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>> 
>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Miles.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many
>>>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition.
>>>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>   * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>>     Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>>   * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>>     the Entity Engine.
>>>>>>   * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>>>>     existing tools).
>>>>>>   * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>>     tools).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically
>>>>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see
>>>>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it
>>>>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead
>>>>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's
>>>>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or
>>>>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but
>>>>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing.
>>>>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual
>>>>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would
>>>>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming
>>>>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI
>>>>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss
>>>>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Nicolas MALIN
>> Consultant
>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>> -------
>> Société LibrenBerry
>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>> 
>> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Rodrigo Lima <ac...@gmail.com>]

Hi David,

I believe it is worth following in a path parallel to the Entity Engine,
which already has its
value and trust already established.
A model that looks interesting data model would be to create a layer as the
SDO (Service Data Objects http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Data_Objects)
to
services layer, which could easily be used by various technologies UI Tier.

A great detail is the question of objects typed and untyped.

Some might say that this issue is easily solved with Web Services, however,
in practice, it is not so simple for many platforms.

Regards,

Rodrigo


2010/3/11 Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>

> -1
>
> BJ, Ruth,
>
> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a bit
> stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity
> engine.
> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error at
> the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of the
> entityengine.
> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
> connections, abstractions, and more.
> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were big
> business needs.
>
> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add more
> smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong as
> before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed, the
> generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings ?).
> for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see how
> entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>
> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
> entity-engine with hibernate.
> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>
> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a strong
> base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA tools
> in its data model can only be a good thing.
>
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
>
> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>
>  +1
>> Thank you BJ.
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>
>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>
>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>
>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>
>>> =======================
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman
>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <
>>> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>
>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>
>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>> Linkedin
>>> <
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>
>>>
>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Miles.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many
>>>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition.
>>>>> That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>
>>>>>    * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>      Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>    * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>      the Entity Engine.
>>>>>    * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>>>      existing tools).
>>>>>    * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>      tools).
>>>>>
>>>>> More to come...
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically
>>>>>> the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see
>>>>>> used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it
>>>>>> (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead
>>>>>> of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's
>>>>>> true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or
>>>>>> on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but
>>>>>> brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing.
>>>>>> The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual
>>>>>> contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would
>>>>>> be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming
>>>>>> and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI
>>>>>> tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss
>>>>>> things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Nicolas MALIN
> Consultant
> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
> -------
> Société LibrenBerry
> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>
>

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>]

Hi David,

Yes, I remember very well this discussion ;)  .
 From my POV, compilation is good but has some limitations. Interpreting 
is also good, and has other limitations. So mixing both, and adding some 
good practices is then a very nice way to go.

In neogia, we are using generated java files from entitymodel for 
developping java code.
One Entity is then transformed in two classes : EntityBase.java and 
EntityService.java. Generated files contains an attributes list, some 
getter/setter and functions to get associations. It's a heritage of 
GenericValue so we can use as GV or Object oriented method. This make 
easier big java service development with ide auto-completion, 
simplification to read complexe object as DynamicView and possibility to 
switch  in oriented object code and  relational code (to select to best 
approch as appropriate)
We also added other functions as edit / remove / beforeStore ... but 
they will pass to deprecated because intrepreted language is really 
better for that and I prefer use the auto-entity service and seca .

I'm sure we can improve the generators for a better integration with the 
OFBiz concept ;)  if the OFBiz community is interested.

Nicolas

David E Jones a écrit :
> Nicolas,
>
> I guess this goes back to discussions on approach even as basic as compiled versus interpreted languages, or at least the issue of typos in variable names.
>
> What is it that you like about having these generated classes to use? You mentioned auto-completion in IDEs and compile time variable name and type checking. Are there other ways this makes your life easier, or is that the main point?
>
> -David
>
>
> On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Nicolas Malin wrote:
>
>   
>> -1
>>
>> BJ, Ruth,
>>
>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity engine.
>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of the entityengine.
>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of connections, abstractions, and more.
>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were big business needs.
>>
>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap, and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
>>
>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace entity-engine with hibernate.
>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>
>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>     
>>> +1
>>> Thank you BJ.
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>>
>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>
>>>> =======================
>>>>
>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>
>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>
>>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>> Linkedin
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro> 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>   
>>>>>           
>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>>      Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>>    * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>>      the Entity Engine.
>>>>>>    * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>>>>      existing tools).
>>>>>>    * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>>      tools).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>     
>>>>>>             
>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>          
>>>>>>>               
>>>>>    
>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>         
>> -- 
>> Nicolas MALIN
>> Consultant
>> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
>> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
>> -------
>> Société LibrenBerry
>> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
>> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
>>
>>     
>
>   



-- 
Nicolas MALIN
Consultant
Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
-------
Société LibrenBerry
Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
Site : http://www.librenberry.net/

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[David E Jones <de...@me.com>]

Nicolas,

I guess this goes back to discussions on approach even as basic as compiled versus interpreted languages, or at least the issue of typos in variable names.

What is it that you like about having these generated classes to use? You mentioned auto-completion in IDEs and compile time variable name and type checking. Are there other ways this makes your life easier, or is that the main point?

-David


On Mar 11, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Nicolas Malin wrote:

> -1
> 
> BJ, Ruth,
> 
> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the entity engine.
> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty of the entityengine.
> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of connections, abstractions, and more.
> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were big business needs.
> 
> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap, and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation combination is valuable.
> 
> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace entity-engine with hibernate.
> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
> 
> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
> 
> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>> +1
>> Thank you BJ.
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>> 
>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>> 
>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>> 
>>> =======================
>>> 
>>> BJ Freeman
>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>> 
>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>> 
>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>> Linkedin
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>> 
>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>> 
>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Miles.
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>> 
>>>>>    * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>      Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>    * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>      the Entity Engine.
>>>>>    * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>>>      existing tools).
>>>>>    * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>      tools).
>>>>> 
>>>>> More to come...
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>     
>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>          
>>>> 
>>>>    
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  
> 
> 
> -- 
> Nicolas MALIN
> Consultant
> Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
> Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
> -------
> Société LibrenBerry
> Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
> Site : http://www.librenberry.net/
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Nicolas Malin <ma...@librenberry.net>]

-1

BJ, Ruth,

Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a 
bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the 
entity engine.
It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error 
at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty 
of the entityengine.
Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now 
more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of 
connections, abstractions, and more.
The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were 
big business needs.

At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap, 
and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add 
more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as 
strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java 
is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on 
error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia 
accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation 
combination is valuable.

 From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not 
revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace 
entity-engine with hibernate.
Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.

 From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a 
strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding 
MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.

Cheers,
Nicolas

Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
> +1
> Thank you BJ.
> Ruth
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>
> BJ Freeman wrote:
>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>
>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>
>> =======================
>>
>> BJ Freeman
>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation 
>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>
>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>
>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>> Linkedin
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro> 
>>
>>
>>
>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>  
>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There 
>>> are
>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>
>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity 
>>> definition
>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, 
>>> while
>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive 
>>> than
>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Miles.
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Hi David:
>>>>
>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are 
>>>> many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value 
>>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>
>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>
>>>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>       the Entity Engine.
>>>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how 
>>>> to use
>>>>       existing tools).
>>>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>       tools).
>>>>
>>>> More to come...
>>>> Ruth
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword 
>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>
>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>      
>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz 
>>>>> (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>
>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to 
>>>>> see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you 
>>>>> like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table 
>>>>> in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's 
>>>>> use Hibernate!").
>>>>>
>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and 
>>>>> it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to 
>>>>> actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the 
>>>>> idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in 
>>>>> the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of 
>>>>> things like this where users and more casual contributors had 
>>>>> ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved 
>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I 
>>>>> think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this 
>>>>> mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or 
>>>>> UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to 
>>>>> discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the 
>>>>> "General" thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>
>>>     
>>
>>
>>
>>   


-- 
Nicolas MALIN
Consultant
Tél : 06.17.66.40.06
Site projet : http://www.neogia.org/
-------
Société LibrenBerry
Tél : 02.48.02.56.12
Site : http://www.librenberry.net/

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>]

+1

Jacques

From: "Ruth Hoffman" <rh...@aesolves.com>
> +1
> Thank you BJ.
> Ruth
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>
> BJ Freeman wrote:
>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>
>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>
>> =======================
>>
>> BJ Freeman
>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>
>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>
>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>> Linkedin
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>
>>
>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>
>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>
>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Miles.
>>>
>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi David:
>>>>
>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine 
>>>> value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>
>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>
>>>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>       the Entity Engine.
>>>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>>       existing tools).
>>>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>       tools).
>>>>
>>>> More to come...
>>>> Ruth
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>
>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>
>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what 
>>>>> you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool 
>>>>> (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>>
>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to 
>>>>> actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas 
>>>>> in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors 
>>>>> had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What 
>>>>> I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of 
>>>>> ideas.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd 
>>>>> like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>]

Sorry Nicolas,

I agree with BJ, I have used both Neogia and OFBiz in many projects  and I far prefer the OFBiz way.
One point I did not like in Neogia (maybe it has changed since I always used a version based on R4.0) is the time it takes to 
compile, much longer than OFBiz.
Even if I avoid to use Java as most as possible (thanks to Widgets/Groovy and minlilang), depending on projects you have sometimes 
to compile more...
Also when you look for strings you get more redundancy because some things are "duplicated" in Neogia part.
But I'm maybe missing things like autocomplete? Not sure it's worth the other costs, though...

Jacques

From: "BJ Freeman" <bj...@free-man.net>
> there must be an mis understanding.
> I don't think ofbiz should change just so others people can have it
> easier, at the expense of the ofbiz design.
>
> btw I have been using ofbiz about as long as you.
> I started with java OO and found that I was touching to many points in code.
> Ofbiz design provided a lot less touch points to accomplish the same
> thing. thus has a faster to market design time and less maintainence, IMHO.
>
> ======================
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
> Nicolas Malin sent the following on 3/11/2010 12:34 PM:
>> -1
>>
>> BJ, Ruth,
>>
>> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
>> bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the
>> entity engine.
>> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
>> at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty
>> of the entityengine.
>> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
>> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
>> connections, abstractions, and more.
>> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
>> big business needs.
>>
>> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
>> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
>> more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as
>> strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java
>> is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on
>> error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia
>> accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation
>> combination is valuable.
>>
>> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
>> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
>> entity-engine with hibernate.
>> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
>>
>> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
>> strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding
>> MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Nicolas
>>
>> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>>> +1
>>> Thank you BJ.
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>>
>>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>>
>>>> =======================
>>>>
>>>> BJ Freeman
>>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
>>>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>>
>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>>
>>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>>> Linkedin
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>>
>>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>>>>> are
>>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>>>>> definition
>>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>>>>> while
>>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>>>>> than
>>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Miles.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>>>>>> many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>>       the Entity Engine.
>>>>>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how
>>>>>> to use
>>>>>>       existing tools).
>>>>>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>>       tools).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> More to come...
>>>>>> Ruth
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>>>>>>> (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>>>>>>> see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you
>>>>>>> like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table
>>>>>>> in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's
>>>>>>> use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>>>>>>> it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to
>>>>>>> actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the
>>>>>>> idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in
>>>>>>> the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of
>>>>>>> things like this where users and more casual contributors had
>>>>>>> ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>>>>>>> think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this
>>>>>>> mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>>>>>>> UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>>>>>>> discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the
>>>>>>> "General" thread.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>]

there must be an mis understanding.
I don't think ofbiz should change just so others people can have it
easier, at the expense of the ofbiz design.

btw I have been using ofbiz about as long as you.
I started with java OO and found that I was touching to many points in code.
Ofbiz design provided a lot less touch points to accomplish the same
thing. thus has a faster to market design time and less maintainence, IMHO.

======================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


Nicolas Malin sent the following on 3/11/2010 12:34 PM:
> -1
> 
> BJ, Ruth,
> 
> Saying that OFBiz should move in the same way that other projects is a
> bit stupid, and show that you've not fully understand OFBiz and the
> entity engine.
> It is now 7 years I'm working on OFBiz, and I have made the same error
> at the beginning as others, I did'nt understood at the moment the beauty
> of the entityengine.
> Looking back at my hard start, I'm glad having done this error, and now
> more than mastering the entity engine, and all its abilities in tems of
> connections, abstractions, and more.
> The only fault I found was on huge customers projects where there were
> big business needs.
> 
> At LibrenBerry and Nereide, we've then added generators to fill the gap,
> and this remove nothing from the entity-engine capabilities, but add
> more smoothness in its use. The combination form/screen/minilang is as
> strong as before and more stronger. For big business needs, where java
> is needed, the generated code is more reliable (who never has made on
> error on Strings ?). for an example, you can take a look to neogia
> accounting code, to see how entity-engine and code generation
> combination is valuable.
> 
> From our side, it is sure that helping development by generation is not
> revolutionizing OFBiz, and should not do it, noone told to replace
> entity-engine with hibernate.
> Generation is adding a bigger flexibility and a more reliable product.
> 
> From my point of view, OFBiz is more than just an ERP. It is also a
> strong base for any project, from the small ones to the big ones. Adding
> MDA tools in its data model can only be a good thing.
> 
> Cheers,
> Nicolas
> 
> Ruth Hoffman a écrit :
>> +1
>> Thank you BJ.
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>
>> BJ Freeman wrote:
>>> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
>>> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>>>
>>> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
>>> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>>>
>>> =======================
>>>
>>> BJ Freeman
>>> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation
>>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>>>
>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>>>
>>> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
>>> Linkedin
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>>>  
>>>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>>>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There
>>>> are
>>>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>>>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>>>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>>>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>>>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity
>>>> definition
>>>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>>>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>>>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>>>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>>>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>>>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>>>> OFBIZ already will use it.
>>>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>>>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability,
>>>> while
>>>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>>>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>>>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive
>>>> than
>>>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Miles.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>> Hi David:
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are
>>>>> many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value
>>>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>>>
>>>>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>>>       the Entity Engine.
>>>>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how
>>>>> to use
>>>>>       existing tools).
>>>>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>>>       tools).
>>>>>
>>>>> More to come...
>>>>> Ruth
>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword
>>>>> "myofbiz"
>>>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>>>
>>>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>>>     
>>>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz
>>>>>> (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to
>>>>>> see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you
>>>>>> like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table
>>>>>> in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's
>>>>>> use Hibernate!").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and
>>>>>> it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to
>>>>>> actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the
>>>>>> idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in
>>>>>> the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of
>>>>>> things like this where users and more casual contributors had
>>>>>> ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved
>>>>>> contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I
>>>>>> think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this
>>>>>> mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or
>>>>>> UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to
>>>>>> discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the
>>>>>> "General" thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>           
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>   
> 
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Ruth Hoffman <rh...@aesolves.com>]

+1
Thank you BJ.
Ruth
----------------------------------------------------
Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com

BJ Freeman wrote:
> Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
> not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?
>
> I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
> really understand the design goals of ofbiz.
>
> =======================
>
> BJ Freeman
> http://bjfreeman.elance.com
> Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>
>
> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist
>
> Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
> Linkedin
> <http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>
>
>
> huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
>   
>> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
>> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
>> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
>> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
>> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
>>
>> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
>> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
>> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
>> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
>> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
>> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
>> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
>> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
>> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
>> OFBIZ already will use it. 
>>
>> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
>> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
>> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
>> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
>> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
>> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Miles.
>>
>> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi David:
>>>
>>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many 
>>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value 
>>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>>
>>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>>
>>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>>       the Entity Engine.
>>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>>       existing tools).
>>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>>       tools).
>>>
>>> More to come...
>>> Ruth
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>>
>>> David E Jones wrote:
>>>       
>>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>>
>>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>>
>>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>         
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>   

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Vince Clark <vc...@globalera.com>]

BJ - there is an application that uses many of these other tools. It is not open source, but is assembled entirely from open source tools.

http://elasticpath.com/whatweoffer/ecommerce-platform/

It is not exactly like OFBiz. It doesn't attempt to be an entire ERP system. But close enough for comparison here.

Vince Clark 
vclark@globalera.com 
(303) 493-6723 office 
(303) 523-4843 cell 


----- Original Message -----
From: "BJ Freeman" <bj...@free-man.net>
To: user@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 10:04:08 AM
Subject: Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier


Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?

I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
really understand the design goals of ofbiz.

=======================

BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
> 
> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
> OFBIZ already will use it. 
> 
> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
> 
> Regards,
> Miles.
> 
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many 
>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value 
>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>
>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>
>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>       the Entity Engine.
>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>       existing tools).
>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>       tools).
>>
>> More to come...
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>   
> 
> 
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>]

Let me ask this, if all these other approaches are better why is there
not a application like ofbiz done in them, without using ofbiz at all?

I keep getting the feeling that those that want major changes don't
really understand the design goals of ofbiz.

=======================

BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


huang.miles@gmail.com sent the following on 3/11/2010 8:50 AM:
> While reading the sentence "There are many people out there who don't
> understand the Entity Engine", I felt a problem implied in it: There are
> absolutely much more people "out there", and I'm sure the OFBIZ project
> want to attract them in. Why they keep on asking "Hibernate", "Spring",
> etc, though? Are they all wrong?
> 
> In my opinion, the OFBIZ framework DID do a right thing - to provide
> developers an integrated framework. What I mean is in OFBIZ, the
> developer can define entity in one place and share the entity definition
> across different tiers, form persistence to presentation. This kind of
> integration saved developers a lot from typings and preserved
> consistency across different application tiers. But, this is not what
> Entity Engine itself can provide. All gains come from the integration.
> If we simply separate the OFBIZ entity engine into a stand alone ORM
> like tool, I bet its not very attractive and only people familiar with
> OFBIZ already will use it. 
> 
> On the other hand, if there are another framework such as Grails that
> can provide at least same level of cross tier integration ability, while
> leverage the sophisticated and WELL KNOWN technologies (such as
> Hibernate/JPA for ORM, Spring for service tier component composition,
> Spring MVC for view tier framework). Sounds a little bit attractive than
> "home made" every thing, isn't it?
> 
> Regards,
> Miles.
> 
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 10:23 -0500, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many 
>> people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value 
>> proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>
>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>
>>     * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>       Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>     * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>       the Entity Engine.
>>     * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>       existing tools).
>>     * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>       tools).
>>
>> More to come...
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>   
> 
> 
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>]

been thinking on this. for things Like junits.
it would seem a log file of data changes only that is already in a
format that could be edited and revert changes would be the simplest.


=========================
BJ Freeman
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
Strategic Power Office with Supplier Automation <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=93>
Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/>

Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist

Chat  Y! messenger: bjfr33man
Linkedin
<http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro>


Tim Ruppert sent the following on 3/11/2010 7:27 AM:
> +1 - another thing to add to this list would be the ability to roll back an upgrade or data load so that if issues are found that we can get back, in the system, directly to where we started.  Normally we do this with a staging upgrade first and a db backup second, but having something like this in the system has been requested a few times, so I thought I'd mention it.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ruppert
> 
> On Mar 11, 2010, at 8:23 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote:
> 
>> Hi David:
>>
>> Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.
>>
>> Here's some things I'd consider as additions:
>>
>>   * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
>>     Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
>>   * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
>>     the Entity Engine.
>>   * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
>>     existing tools).
>>   * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
>>     tools).
>>
>> More to come...
>> Ruth
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
>> ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com
>>
>> David E Jones wrote:
>>> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>>>
>>> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>>>
>>> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>>>
>>> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>  
> 
> 

Re: Brainstorming about the Framework: Data Tier

[Ruth Hoffman <rh...@aesolves.com>]

Hi David:

Nothing! I think this is an amazing piece of work. IMO, there are many 
people out there who don't understand the Entity Engine value 
proposition. That is why they keep asking for "Hibernate" etc.

Here's some things I'd consider as additions:

    * Maybe making a separate component/webapp to manage the Entity
      Engine. Take it out of WebTools.
    * Include in that webapp any security/role management specific to
      the Entity Engine.
    * Entity Engine performance tools (or more information on how to use
      existing tools).
    * Better backup tools (or more information on how to use existing
      tools).

More to come...
Ruth
----------------------------------------------------
Find me on the web at http://www.myofbiz.com or Google keyword "myofbiz"
ruth.hoffman@myofbiz.com

David E Jones wrote:
> If you could change anything about the data tier in OFBiz (basically the Entity Engine), what would you change?
>
> All comments are welcome. If there is another tool you'd like to see used instead of the Entity Engine, please describe what you like about it (like "I want to have an Java class for each table in my database") instead of just mentioning the tool (like "let's use Hibernate!").
>
> Why am I asking? This topic comes up every once in a while, and it's true that many suggestions never get enough support to actually happen (or on further research it is decided that the idea is not tenable), but brainstorming about them to get ideas in the open is still a great thing. The history of OFBiz is full of things like this where users and more casual contributors had ideas and saw possibilities that others, even more involved contributors, totally missed or never looked at that way. What I think would be fun, and ultimately useful too, is to keep this mostly to brainstorming and not do too much comparing of ideas.
>
> BTW, if you want to brainstorm about another tier (ie the Logic or UI tiers) please use the other threads on those. If you'd like to discuss things that aren't specific to a tier look for the "General" thread.
>
> -David
>
>
>