You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by "David E. Jones" <jo...@hotwaxmedia.com> on 2008/09/01 04:02:16 UTC
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Enrique Ruibal wrote:
> With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.org vs.
> cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for apache to
> upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their servers?
That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to an older version might cause problems when
exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for a significant amount of time before people
eventually weed them all out.
I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to update soon, but I've been thinking that for a
while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know.
-David
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>.
+1
Great idea Bruno, I agree with you that CMS is a strong component within
ofbiz and these suggestions are great
-Enrique Ruibal
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19299665.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
> What I have so far is in the board report draft (based on the email
> report I sent to the PMC a few weeks ago):
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Report+2008-12+DRAFT
I see that some stats would be appreciated on the Board Report. I remember Jacopo doing such stats some time ago.
Jacopo, how did you do this stats, have you something ready we could use ?
Thanks
Jacques
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Cool - I'll subscribe to this and start the process. It sounds like I
should set up the stuff on our servers for now, but see how they want
to proceed. Thanks for the info David.
Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Nov 16, 2008, at 7:37 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> What I have so far is in the board report draft (based on the email
> report I sent to the PMC a few weeks ago):
>
> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Report+2008-12+DRAFT
>
> As mentioned in there none of these have been a high priority, but
> it is an outstanding issue that board members, and more recently and
> vocally PRC members, have brought up. I'm not sure if the
> infrastructure guys really care where OFBiz resources are hosted...
> my experience is consistent with yours Tim that they don't seem to
> worried about it.
>
> Right now I consider this a lower priority item and there doesn't
> seem to be huge urgency on it, but it does need to be done sooner or
> later, and help on it would be very appreciated!
>
> Most discussions happen on the "infrastructure@apache.org" mailing
> list and anyone can subscribe to that. Lots of things happen based
> on discussions there, and then issues in the infra Jira project.
> They also have an IRC room that some hang out it, and that they use
> when more coordination is needed for certain changes.
>
> -David
>
>
> On Nov 16, 2008, at 9:20 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> Not contradictory at all, I'm just ignorant to this fact, since I
>> hadn't seen it broadcast and I've been the one handling it for the
>> community.
>>
>> Let's start moving it right away then if they've got the bandwidth
>> to do this. I've had numerous meetings with the infrastructure
>> group and would be more than happy to dive into this role - just
>> didn't know they were offering! Aaron Farr, Noel Bergmann and the
>> infrastructure guys and I had many meetings and discussions about
>> doing this - but they didn't seem like, "Please move all of your
>> stuff over here." - they seemed more like, "Let's start discussing
>> this and we'll figure out when it's time to do this."
>>
>> In fact, I was in the process of getting another server dedicated
>> to this effort on our infrastructure, but if the ASF can handle all
>> of this, then let's try our hand at doing it this way:
>>
>> 1. Move the demo servers immediately
>> 2. Move the nightly builds and that process immediately
>> 3. Decide what we want to do longer term (Confluence vs.
>> WebSlinger) and move that
>> -- This will take some more thought - we could obviously do #4 first
>> -- I just didn't want them to have to manage that.
>> 4. Move document repository
>>
>> Anyways, if we're ready to go, I'll put the halt on the new server
>> and the new services we were planning. Add me to whatever list i
>> need to in order to get in touch and I'll drive the process with
>> infrastructure to get it all going. I doubt it's as easy to drop
>> in as you were alluding to, but I'm happy to push that along as
>> much as possible.
>>
>> I'm also going to send another email to this list about what the
>> ASF did ask for while we were there in hopes that we can all be a
>> part of a more directed, coordinated effort to build something on
>> top of OFBiz directly to meet the ASF needs.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tim
>> --
>> Tim Ruppert
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> o:801.649.6594
>> f:801.649.6595
>>
>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 7:07 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I'm sorry to be contradictory, but I don't think this statement is
>>> true: "the ASF is not ready to host all of these things - nightly
>>> builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc"
>>>
>>> The ASF infra certainly IS ready for these things, and nearly all
>>> other projects DO those things on ASF infra. In fact, it has been
>>> brought up as a concern by a few other people in the foundation
>>> that OFBiz is not doing these exact things on ASF infra, and we
>>> really need to address that concern. There are legal and public
>>> relations, as well as maintenance/etc, concerns. At this point
>>> it's enough of an issue that I've been asked to include a report
>>> on this in the next board report, and keep updating status on it
>>> in board reports until it is complete. The PMC has been discussing
>>> this a bit, and Jacques has started working on some things for his
>>> external servers.
>>>
>>> It may be easier to use infra that we're familiar with already,
>>> but we need to start working with the infra people at the ASF and
>>> solving some of these problems in more collaboration with them.
>>>
>>> Actually, it's a great opportunity to do so now because they may
>>> have great feedback on things we should do in the apps and/or
>>> other things we can improve in OFBiz. It was great to meet a lot
>>> of the infra people at ApacheCon, and even to work side-by-side
>>> with a few of them digging postholes and pounding nails into a
>>> fence. It's definitely volunteer driven, but there are good people
>>> there to work with. And, if anyone gets impatient with what is
>>> going on over there... then volunteering to work on infra is the
>>> appropriate way to resolve that! ;)
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 8:54 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Whenever the community is ready, we can host an instance for
>>>> these purposes (at least until the ASF is ready to do this).
>>>> This is not an issue right now since the ASF is not ready to host
>>>> all of these things - nightly builds, demo sites, documentation
>>>> management, etc - but I agree at some point it would be nice if
>>>> this was all under the ASF umbrella. Whenever they're ready,
>>>> we'll be more than happy to move all of that stuff to the ASF -
>>>> but for now, if we need additional infrastructure, we have a
>>>> place where it can be hosted, at no charge to anyone else, that
>>>> will meet everyone's needs.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I think that this all kinda depends when we have
>>>> WebSlinger integrated and into OFBiz officially, as it's the only
>>>> interface I've seen on top of OFBiz that would be possible to
>>>> replace something like Confluence.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Tim
>>>> --
>>>> Tim Ruppert
>>>> HotWax Media
>>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>>
>>>> o:801.649.6594
>>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 6:45 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. create list of activities we want to be able to do with OFBiz
>>>>> (in the OFBREQDES space on docs.ofbiz.org)
>>>>> 2. design screens, etc needed for enabling (and dare I say...
>>>>> automating) these activities
>>>>> 3. develop and contribute functionality, perhaps in a new
>>>>> component in specialpurpose that is just for enabling
>>>>> collaboration on open source projects (project mgmt, content
>>>>> mgmt, etc for open source projects)
>>>>> 4. a number of people try to use it locally and send feedback
>>>>> and ideas to this mailing list, and refine #1 and repeat
>>>>> 5. get a test server up somewhere for people to try it out in a
>>>>> group setting on a small set of content, tasks, etc (possibly
>>>>> optional if #4 is good enough)
>>>>> 6. deploy to a production server and really start using for OFBiz
>>>>>
>>>>> If I understand what you are saying, it is like #5. Before
>>>>> trying to do that I'd like to at least do #4, and preferably
>>>>> #1-3 before that.
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 2:01 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's great,
>>>>>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it
>>>>>> working as a CMS
>>>>>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that
>>>>>> will then be
>>>>>> moved into the Apache server.
>>>>>> Is this possible?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>>>>>>> hosted on ASF
>>>>>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra
>>>>>>> are actually an
>>>>>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>>>>>>> confluence,
>>>>>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>>>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in
>>>>>>>> place of
>>>>>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache
>>>>>>>> Symposium
>>>>>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM
>>>>>>>> will do
>>>>>>>> something about.
>>>>>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>>>>>>> running.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be
>>>>>>>>> started on your
>>>>>>>>> end?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
What I have so far is in the board report draft (based on the email
report I sent to the PMC a few weeks ago):
http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/ASF+Board+Report+2008-12+DRAFT
As mentioned in there none of these have been a high priority, but it
is an outstanding issue that board members, and more recently and
vocally PRC members, have brought up. I'm not sure if the
infrastructure guys really care where OFBiz resources are hosted... my
experience is consistent with yours Tim that they don't seem to
worried about it.
Right now I consider this a lower priority item and there doesn't seem
to be huge urgency on it, but it does need to be done sooner or later,
and help on it would be very appreciated!
Most discussions happen on the "infrastructure@apache.org" mailing
list and anyone can subscribe to that. Lots of things happen based on
discussions there, and then issues in the infra Jira project. They
also have an IRC room that some hang out it, and that they use when
more coordination is needed for certain changes.
-David
On Nov 16, 2008, at 9:20 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Not contradictory at all, I'm just ignorant to this fact, since I
> hadn't seen it broadcast and I've been the one handling it for the
> community.
>
> Let's start moving it right away then if they've got the bandwidth
> to do this. I've had numerous meetings with the infrastructure
> group and would be more than happy to dive into this role - just
> didn't know they were offering! Aaron Farr, Noel Bergmann and the
> infrastructure guys and I had many meetings and discussions about
> doing this - but they didn't seem like, "Please move all of your
> stuff over here." - they seemed more like, "Let's start discussing
> this and we'll figure out when it's time to do this."
>
> In fact, I was in the process of getting another server dedicated to
> this effort on our infrastructure, but if the ASF can handle all of
> this, then let's try our hand at doing it this way:
>
> 1. Move the demo servers immediately
> 2. Move the nightly builds and that process immediately
> 3. Decide what we want to do longer term (Confluence vs. WebSlinger)
> and move that
> -- This will take some more thought - we could obviously do #4 first
> -- I just didn't want them to have to manage that.
> 4. Move document repository
>
> Anyways, if we're ready to go, I'll put the halt on the new server
> and the new services we were planning. Add me to whatever list i
> need to in order to get in touch and I'll drive the process with
> infrastructure to get it all going. I doubt it's as easy to drop in
> as you were alluding to, but I'm happy to push that along as much as
> possible.
>
> I'm also going to send another email to this list about what the ASF
> did ask for while we were there in hopes that we can all be a part
> of a more directed, coordinated effort to build something on top of
> OFBiz directly to meet the ASF needs.
>
> Cheers,
> Tim
> --
> Tim Ruppert
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> o:801.649.6594
> f:801.649.6595
>
> On Nov 16, 2008, at 7:07 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm sorry to be contradictory, but I don't think this statement is
>> true: "the ASF is not ready to host all of these things - nightly
>> builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc"
>>
>> The ASF infra certainly IS ready for these things, and nearly all
>> other projects DO those things on ASF infra. In fact, it has been
>> brought up as a concern by a few other people in the foundation
>> that OFBiz is not doing these exact things on ASF infra, and we
>> really need to address that concern. There are legal and public
>> relations, as well as maintenance/etc, concerns. At this point it's
>> enough of an issue that I've been asked to include a report on this
>> in the next board report, and keep updating status on it in board
>> reports until it is complete. The PMC has been discussing this a
>> bit, and Jacques has started working on some things for his
>> external servers.
>>
>> It may be easier to use infra that we're familiar with already, but
>> we need to start working with the infra people at the ASF and
>> solving some of these problems in more collaboration with them.
>>
>> Actually, it's a great opportunity to do so now because they may
>> have great feedback on things we should do in the apps and/or other
>> things we can improve in OFBiz. It was great to meet a lot of the
>> infra people at ApacheCon, and even to work side-by-side with a few
>> of them digging postholes and pounding nails into a fence. It's
>> definitely volunteer driven, but there are good people there to
>> work with. And, if anyone gets impatient with what is going on over
>> there... then volunteering to work on infra is the appropriate way
>> to resolve that! ;)
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 8:54 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>>
>>> Whenever the community is ready, we can host an instance for these
>>> purposes (at least until the ASF is ready to do this). This is
>>> not an issue right now since the ASF is not ready to host all of
>>> these things - nightly builds, demo sites, documentation
>>> management, etc - but I agree at some point it would be nice if
>>> this was all under the ASF umbrella. Whenever they're ready,
>>> we'll be more than happy to move all of that stuff to the ASF -
>>> but for now, if we need additional infrastructure, we have a place
>>> where it can be hosted, at no charge to anyone else, that will
>>> meet everyone's needs.
>>>
>>> Personally, I think that this all kinda depends when we have
>>> WebSlinger integrated and into OFBiz officially, as it's the only
>>> interface I've seen on top of OFBiz that would be possible to
>>> replace something like Confluence.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Tim
>>> --
>>> Tim Ruppert
>>> HotWax Media
>>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>>
>>> o:801.649.6594
>>> f:801.649.6595
>>>
>>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 6:45 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. create list of activities we want to be able to do with OFBiz
>>>> (in the OFBREQDES space on docs.ofbiz.org)
>>>> 2. design screens, etc needed for enabling (and dare I say...
>>>> automating) these activities
>>>> 3. develop and contribute functionality, perhaps in a new
>>>> component in specialpurpose that is just for enabling
>>>> collaboration on open source projects (project mgmt, content
>>>> mgmt, etc for open source projects)
>>>> 4. a number of people try to use it locally and send feedback and
>>>> ideas to this mailing list, and refine #1 and repeat
>>>> 5. get a test server up somewhere for people to try it out in a
>>>> group setting on a small set of content, tasks, etc (possibly
>>>> optional if #4 is good enough)
>>>> 6. deploy to a production server and really start using for OFBiz
>>>>
>>>> If I understand what you are saying, it is like #5. Before trying
>>>> to do that I'd like to at least do #4, and preferably #1-3 before
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 2:01 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That's great,
>>>>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it
>>>>> working as a CMS
>>>>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that
>>>>> will then be
>>>>> moved into the Apache server.
>>>>> Is this possible?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>
>>>>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>>>>>> hosted on ASF
>>>>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
>>>>>> actually an
>>>>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>>>>>> confluence,
>>>>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in
>>>>>>> place of
>>>>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache
>>>>>>> Symposium
>>>>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM
>>>>>>> will do
>>>>>>> something about.
>>>>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>>>>>> running.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be
>>>>>>>> started on your
>>>>>>>> end?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Not contradictory at all, I'm just ignorant to this fact, since I
hadn't seen it broadcast and I've been the one handling it for the
community.
Let's start moving it right away then if they've got the bandwidth to
do this. I've had numerous meetings with the infrastructure group and
would be more than happy to dive into this role - just didn't know
they were offering! Aaron Farr, Noel Bergmann and the infrastructure
guys and I had many meetings and discussions about doing this - but
they didn't seem like, "Please move all of your stuff over here." -
they seemed more like, "Let's start discussing this and we'll figure
out when it's time to do this."
In fact, I was in the process of getting another server dedicated to
this effort on our infrastructure, but if the ASF can handle all of
this, then let's try our hand at doing it this way:
1. Move the demo servers immediately
2. Move the nightly builds and that process immediately
3. Decide what we want to do longer term (Confluence vs. WebSlinger)
and move that
-- This will take some more thought - we could obviously do #4 first
-- I just didn't want them to have to manage that.
4. Move document repository
Anyways, if we're ready to go, I'll put the halt on the new server and
the new services we were planning. Add me to whatever list i need to
in order to get in touch and I'll drive the process with
infrastructure to get it all going. I doubt it's as easy to drop in
as you were alluding to, but I'm happy to push that along as much as
possible.
I'm also going to send another email to this list about what the ASF
did ask for while we were there in hopes that we can all be a part of
a more directed, coordinated effort to build something on top of OFBiz
directly to meet the ASF needs.
Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Nov 16, 2008, at 7:07 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> I'm sorry to be contradictory, but I don't think this statement is
> true: "the ASF is not ready to host all of these things - nightly
> builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc"
>
> The ASF infra certainly IS ready for these things, and nearly all
> other projects DO those things on ASF infra. In fact, it has been
> brought up as a concern by a few other people in the foundation that
> OFBiz is not doing these exact things on ASF infra, and we really
> need to address that concern. There are legal and public relations,
> as well as maintenance/etc, concerns. At this point it's enough of
> an issue that I've been asked to include a report on this in the
> next board report, and keep updating status on it in board reports
> until it is complete. The PMC has been discussing this a bit, and
> Jacques has started working on some things for his external servers.
>
> It may be easier to use infra that we're familiar with already, but
> we need to start working with the infra people at the ASF and
> solving some of these problems in more collaboration with them.
>
> Actually, it's a great opportunity to do so now because they may
> have great feedback on things we should do in the apps and/or other
> things we can improve in OFBiz. It was great to meet a lot of the
> infra people at ApacheCon, and even to work side-by-side with a few
> of them digging postholes and pounding nails into a fence. It's
> definitely volunteer driven, but there are good people there to work
> with. And, if anyone gets impatient with what is going on over
> there... then volunteering to work on infra is the appropriate way
> to resolve that! ;)
>
> -David
>
>
> On Nov 16, 2008, at 8:54 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
>
>> Whenever the community is ready, we can host an instance for these
>> purposes (at least until the ASF is ready to do this). This is not
>> an issue right now since the ASF is not ready to host all of these
>> things - nightly builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc
>> - but I agree at some point it would be nice if this was all under
>> the ASF umbrella. Whenever they're ready, we'll be more than happy
>> to move all of that stuff to the ASF - but for now, if we need
>> additional infrastructure, we have a place where it can be hosted,
>> at no charge to anyone else, that will meet everyone's needs.
>>
>> Personally, I think that this all kinda depends when we have
>> WebSlinger integrated and into OFBiz officially, as it's the only
>> interface I've seen on top of OFBiz that would be possible to
>> replace something like Confluence.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tim
>> --
>> Tim Ruppert
>> HotWax Media
>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>>
>> o:801.649.6594
>> f:801.649.6595
>>
>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 6:45 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 1. create list of activities we want to be able to do with OFBiz
>>> (in the OFBREQDES space on docs.ofbiz.org)
>>> 2. design screens, etc needed for enabling (and dare I say...
>>> automating) these activities
>>> 3. develop and contribute functionality, perhaps in a new
>>> component in specialpurpose that is just for enabling
>>> collaboration on open source projects (project mgmt, content mgmt,
>>> etc for open source projects)
>>> 4. a number of people try to use it locally and send feedback and
>>> ideas to this mailing list, and refine #1 and repeat
>>> 5. get a test server up somewhere for people to try it out in a
>>> group setting on a small set of content, tasks, etc (possibly
>>> optional if #4 is good enough)
>>> 6. deploy to a production server and really start using for OFBiz
>>>
>>> If I understand what you are saying, it is like #5. Before trying
>>> to do that I'd like to at least do #4, and preferably #1-3 before
>>> that.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 2:01 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's great,
>>>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it
>>>> working as a CMS
>>>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that
>>>> will then be
>>>> moved into the Apache server.
>>>> Is this possible?
>>>>
>>>> -Bruno
>>>>
>>>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>>>>> hosted on ASF
>>>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
>>>>> actually an
>>>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>>>>> confluence,
>>>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>>>
>>>>> -David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in
>>>>>> place of
>>>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache
>>>>>> Symposium
>>>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM
>>>>>> will do
>>>>>> something about.
>>>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>>>>> running.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be
>>>>>>> started on your
>>>>>>> end?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
I'm sorry to be contradictory, but I don't think this statement is
true: "the ASF is not ready to host all of these things - nightly
builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc"
The ASF infra certainly IS ready for these things, and nearly all
other projects DO those things on ASF infra. In fact, it has been
brought up as a concern by a few other people in the foundation that
OFBiz is not doing these exact things on ASF infra, and we really need
to address that concern. There are legal and public relations, as well
as maintenance/etc, concerns. At this point it's enough of an issue
that I've been asked to include a report on this in the next board
report, and keep updating status on it in board reports until it is
complete. The PMC has been discussing this a bit, and Jacques has
started working on some things for his external servers.
It may be easier to use infra that we're familiar with already, but we
need to start working with the infra people at the ASF and solving
some of these problems in more collaboration with them.
Actually, it's a great opportunity to do so now because they may have
great feedback on things we should do in the apps and/or other things
we can improve in OFBiz. It was great to meet a lot of the infra
people at ApacheCon, and even to work side-by-side with a few of them
digging postholes and pounding nails into a fence. It's definitely
volunteer driven, but there are good people there to work with. And,
if anyone gets impatient with what is going on over there... then
volunteering to work on infra is the appropriate way to resolve that! ;)
-David
On Nov 16, 2008, at 8:54 AM, Tim Ruppert wrote:
> Whenever the community is ready, we can host an instance for these
> purposes (at least until the ASF is ready to do this). This is not
> an issue right now since the ASF is not ready to host all of these
> things - nightly builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc -
> but I agree at some point it would be nice if this was all under the
> ASF umbrella. Whenever they're ready, we'll be more than happy to
> move all of that stuff to the ASF - but for now, if we need
> additional infrastructure, we have a place where it can be hosted,
> at no charge to anyone else, that will meet everyone's needs.
>
> Personally, I think that this all kinda depends when we have
> WebSlinger integrated and into OFBiz officially, as it's the only
> interface I've seen on top of OFBiz that would be possible to
> replace something like Confluence.
>
> Cheers,
> Tim
> --
> Tim Ruppert
> HotWax Media
> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
>
> o:801.649.6594
> f:801.649.6595
>
> On Nov 16, 2008, at 6:45 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>
>>
>> 1. create list of activities we want to be able to do with OFBiz
>> (in the OFBREQDES space on docs.ofbiz.org)
>> 2. design screens, etc needed for enabling (and dare I say...
>> automating) these activities
>> 3. develop and contribute functionality, perhaps in a new component
>> in specialpurpose that is just for enabling collaboration on open
>> source projects (project mgmt, content mgmt, etc for open source
>> projects)
>> 4. a number of people try to use it locally and send feedback and
>> ideas to this mailing list, and refine #1 and repeat
>> 5. get a test server up somewhere for people to try it out in a
>> group setting on a small set of content, tasks, etc (possibly
>> optional if #4 is good enough)
>> 6. deploy to a production server and really start using for OFBiz
>>
>> If I understand what you are saying, it is like #5. Before trying
>> to do that I'd like to at least do #4, and preferably #1-3 before
>> that.
>>
>> -David
>>
>> On Nov 16, 2008, at 2:01 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>
>>> That's great,
>>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working
>>> as a CMS
>>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that
>>> will then be
>>> moved into the Apache server.
>>> Is this possible?
>>>
>>> -Bruno
>>>
>>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>>>> hosted on ASF
>>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
>>>> actually an
>>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>>>> confluence,
>>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place
>>>>> of
>>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache
>>>>> Symposium
>>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM
>>>>> will do
>>>>> something about.
>>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>>>> running.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be
>>>>>> started on your
>>>>>> end?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Tim Ruppert <ti...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Whenever the community is ready, we can host an instance for these
purposes (at least until the ASF is ready to do this). This is not an
issue right now since the ASF is not ready to host all of these things
- nightly builds, demo sites, documentation management, etc - but I
agree at some point it would be nice if this was all under the ASF
umbrella. Whenever they're ready, we'll be more than happy to move
all of that stuff to the ASF - but for now, if we need additional
infrastructure, we have a place where it can be hosted, at no charge
to anyone else, that will meet everyone's needs.
Personally, I think that this all kinda depends when we have
WebSlinger integrated and into OFBiz officially, as it's the only
interface I've seen on top of OFBiz that would be possible to replace
something like Confluence.
Cheers,
Tim
--
Tim Ruppert
HotWax Media
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com
o:801.649.6594
f:801.649.6595
On Nov 16, 2008, at 6:45 AM, David E Jones wrote:
>
> 1. create list of activities we want to be able to do with OFBiz (in
> the OFBREQDES space on docs.ofbiz.org)
> 2. design screens, etc needed for enabling (and dare I say...
> automating) these activities
> 3. develop and contribute functionality, perhaps in a new component
> in specialpurpose that is just for enabling collaboration on open
> source projects (project mgmt, content mgmt, etc for open source
> projects)
> 4. a number of people try to use it locally and send feedback and
> ideas to this mailing list, and refine #1 and repeat
> 5. get a test server up somewhere for people to try it out in a
> group setting on a small set of content, tasks, etc (possibly
> optional if #4 is good enough)
> 6. deploy to a production server and really start using for OFBiz
>
> If I understand what you are saying, it is like #5. Before trying to
> do that I'd like to at least do #4, and preferably #1-3 before that.
>
> -David
>
> On Nov 16, 2008, at 2:01 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>
>> That's great,
>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working
>> as a CMS
>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that will
>> then be
>> moved into the Apache server.
>> Is this possible?
>>
>> -Bruno
>>
>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>
>>>
>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>>> hosted on ASF
>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
>>> actually an
>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>>> confluence,
>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>
>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM
>>>> will do
>>>> something about.
>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>>> running.
>>>>
>>>> -Bruno
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be
>>>>> started on your
>>>>> end?
>>>>>
>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
1. create list of activities we want to be able to do with OFBiz (in
the OFBREQDES space on docs.ofbiz.org)
2. design screens, etc needed for enabling (and dare I say...
automating) these activities
3. develop and contribute functionality, perhaps in a new component in
specialpurpose that is just for enabling collaboration on open source
projects (project mgmt, content mgmt, etc for open source projects)
4. a number of people try to use it locally and send feedback and
ideas to this mailing list, and refine #1 and repeat
5. get a test server up somewhere for people to try it out in a group
setting on a small set of content, tasks, etc (possibly optional if #4
is good enough)
6. deploy to a production server and really start using for OFBiz
If I understand what you are saying, it is like #5. Before trying to
do that I'd like to at least do #4, and preferably #1-3 before that.
-David
On Nov 16, 2008, at 2:01 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
> That's great,
> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working
> as a CMS
> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that will
> then be
> moved into the Apache server.
> Is this possible?
>
> -Bruno
>
> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
>>
>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>> hosted on ASF
>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
>> actually an
>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>> confluence,
>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>
>> Hi Enrique,
>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>
>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will
>>> do
>>> something about.
>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>> running.
>>>
>>> -Bruno
>>>
>>>
>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>
>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started
>>>> on your
>>>> end?
>>>>
>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Actually I like Confluence (and Jira). But as momentum is to use our own tools, I was thinking about a way to easily share our work
on documentation, as we do on code.
But there is obviously a downside : it would need more work to incorporate no commiter work. So a tool like Confluence is still the
best. Hopefully the portlets will leverage the CRM and we will be able to provide a such tool for ourself and ASF. I must say that I
have not much time to think about it for the moment.
Jacques
From: "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
> As we're discussing how we want content management to work...
>
> What about SubVersion is it that you think would be helpful for managing documentation in OFBiz?
>
> -David
>
> P.S. On a note of history: using the source repo for docs has been discussed before, and in fact used to be how we did it in
> OFBiz.
>
>
> On Nov 16, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> We should also thing about how to organize the content and how to coordinate our efforts. Subversion allow us to this deal with
>> most other things (code actually). Why not trying to use it also to maintain our documentation ?
>> Also should we not clearly separate documentations by goals we intend to reach. This is what is already done with Confluence
>> workspaces, but maybe we should make this even more clear.
>>
>> My 2 cts
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> From: "Bruno Busco" <br...@gmail.com>
>>> That's great,
>>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working as a CMS
>>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that will then be
>>> moved into the Apache server.
>>> Is this possible?
>>>
>>> -Bruno
>>>
>>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it hosted on ASF
>>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are actually an
>>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie confluence,
>>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
>>>>> something about.
>>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Bruno
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started on your
>>>>>> end?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
As we're discussing how we want content management to work...
What about SubVersion is it that you think would be helpful for
managing documentation in OFBiz?
-David
P.S. On a note of history: using the source repo for docs has been
discussed before, and in fact used to be how we did it in OFBiz.
On Nov 16, 2008, at 8:36 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> We should also thing about how to organize the content and how to
> coordinate our efforts. Subversion allow us to this deal with most
> other things (code actually). Why not trying to use it also to
> maintain our documentation ?
> Also should we not clearly separate documentations by goals we
> intend to reach. This is what is already done with Confluence
> workspaces, but maybe we should make this even more clear.
>
> My 2 cts
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Bruno Busco" <br...@gmail.com>
>> That's great,
>> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working
>> as a CMS
>> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that will
>> then be
>> moved into the Apache server.
>> Is this possible?
>>
>> -Bruno
>>
>> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>>
>>>
>>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it
>>> hosted on ASF
>>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
>>> actually an
>>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie
>>> confluence,
>>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Enrique,
>>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>>
>>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM
>>>> will do
>>>> something about.
>>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept
>>>> running.
>>>>
>>>> -Bruno
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be
>>>>> started on your
>>>>> end?
>>>>>
>>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
We should also thing about how to organize the content and how to coordinate our efforts. Subversion allow us to this deal with most
other things (code actually). Why not trying to use it also to maintain our documentation ?
Also should we not clearly separate documentations by goals we intend to reach. This is what is already done with Confluence
workspaces, but maybe we should make this even more clear.
My 2 cts
Jacques
From: "Bruno Busco" <br...@gmail.com>
> That's great,
> but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working as a CMS
> in a live site where we all have access and with contents that will then be
> moved into the Apache server.
> Is this possible?
>
> -Bruno
>
> 2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
>>
>> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it hosted on ASF
>> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are actually an
>> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie confluence,
>> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>>
>> -David
>>
>>
>>
>> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>>
>> Hi Enrique,
>>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>>> (according to David's notes).
>>>
>>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
>>> something about.
>>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
>>>
>>> -Bruno
>>>
>>>
>>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>>
>>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started on your
>>>> end?
>>>>
>>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Enrique R.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Bruno Busco <br...@gmail.com>.
That's great,
but in order to get OFBiz ready, I think we should have it working as a CMS
in a live site where we all have access and with contents that will then be
moved into the Apache server.
Is this possible?
-Bruno
2008/11/13 David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it hosted on ASF
> infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are actually an
> issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point (ie confluence,
> nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>
> -David
>
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>
> Hi Enrique,
>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>> (according to David's notes).
>>
>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
>> something about.
>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
>>
>> -Bruno
>>
>>
>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>
>>
>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>
>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started on your
>>> end?
>>>
>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Enrique R.
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
This is only a suggestion so far, don't worry as this stage. But yes we should provide what is needed if we go this way.
Thanks
Jacques
From: "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com>
> Before transtioning to Hudson please provide a migration plan, so that
> people can plan when and how-to submit contributions.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pierre
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Ray <ra...@makeyour-point.com> wrote:
>
>> I think it is wrong to suggest you will get less contributions. Once a
>> test framework and structure is in place writing tests as you go takes
>> no longer than the development and manual test process, and often it can
>> reduce the time. I think for more people its a mind set adjustment, but
>> it means you do more structured testing at the point of development
>> rather than come back days/weeks/months later to find that obscure bug.
>>
>> There is a transition period that will be a little bumpy as people
>> adjust but and as you say sensible decisions need to be made about what
>> contributions require a test module like new features, bug fixes,
>> enhancements etc.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> > Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of
>> > Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
>> > http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
>> > http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
>> >
>> > Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more
>> > reliable set of tests.
>> > Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new
>> > features without tests).
>> > I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
>> > better to have less but more robust.
>> >
>> > I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
>> >
>> > Jacques
>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
Before transtioning to Hudson please provide a migration plan, so that
people can plan when and how-to submit contributions.
Regards,
Pierre
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Ray <ra...@makeyour-point.com> wrote:
> I think it is wrong to suggest you will get less contributions. Once a
> test framework and structure is in place writing tests as you go takes
> no longer than the development and manual test process, and often it can
> reduce the time. I think for more people its a mind set adjustment, but
> it means you do more structured testing at the point of development
> rather than come back days/weeks/months later to find that obscure bug.
>
> There is a transition period that will be a little bumpy as people
> adjust but and as you say sensible decisions need to be made about what
> contributions require a test module like new features, bug fixes,
> enhancements etc.
>
> Ray
>
>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of
> > Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
> > http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
> > http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
> >
> > Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more
> > reliable set of tests.
> > Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new
> > features without tests).
> > I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
> > better to have less but more robust.
> >
> > I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
> >
> > Jacques
>
>
Re: Back to OOTB testing - Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Scott Gray <le...@gmail.com>.
Makes sense, thanks Adam
Regards
Scott
2008/11/14 Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>:
> Scott Gray wrote:
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> I'm no transaction expert but how sure are we that starting a new
>> transaction just before each test and rolling it back at the end won't
>> work? From what I can gather Derby does actually alter the database
>> prior to committing the transaction but it also creates log records
>> that allow the changes to undone in case of a rollback.
>>
>> I just tried it using the JUnitListener class to start and end a
>> transaction and I can't see any obvious negative effects (aside from
>> tests failing that relied on data created in previous tests).
>
> The reason that won't work, is that some services are configured to run
> in a *separate* transaction, completely separate from the one that is in
> the current thread. In those cases, the current transaction is
> suspended, then resumed.
>
> To do the transaction rollback stuff in those cases, becomes rather more
> complex. It's just simpler to save the disk files, and revert them all,
> between tests. Just need to make certain any background threads are
> restarted/shutdown.
>
Re: Back to OOTB testing - Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On Nov 13, 2008, at 6:57 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
> Scott Gray wrote:
>> Hi Adam,
>>
>> I'm no transaction expert but how sure are we that starting a new
>> transaction just before each test and rolling it back at the end
>> won't
>> work? From what I can gather Derby does actually alter the database
>> prior to committing the transaction but it also creates log records
>> that allow the changes to undone in case of a rollback.
>>
>> I just tried it using the JUnitListener class to start and end a
>> transaction and I can't see any obvious negative effects (aside from
>> tests failing that relied on data created in previous tests).
>
> The reason that won't work, is that some services are configured to
> run
> in a *separate* transaction, completely separate from the one that
> is in
> the current thread. In those cases, the current transaction is
> suspended, then resumed.
>
> To do the transaction rollback stuff in those cases, becomes rather
> more
> complex. It's just simpler to save the disk files, and revert them
> all,
> between tests. Just need to make certain any background threads are
> restarted/shutdown.
Yes, this is a good point. It should only be the ones that do a
suspend/resume that cause a problem, but there could be other things
too.
I just did a quick run on my machine and found that loading the seed
and demo data takes about 41 seconds. To do this while running we'd
need to truncate all tables and then reload the seed data, which would
take a bit more time (probably have to drop all foreign keys, truncate
tables, restore fks).
The tar method on my machine is quite a bit faster, and uses a file
that is nearly 100MB. I guess the trick is... can we do that while
OFBiz is running? In other words, can we stop derby and replace its
files right under it and then restart it and get it to play nice?
There is a delay restarting OFBiz, but it's not too bad (and probably
something we could profile and speed up if we wanted to). It would be
pretty easy to create an ant target that does a fresh run-install,
saves the runtime/data directory, runs the tests in one component at a
time, and between them stops ofbiz then resets runtime/data then
starts ofbiz again.
It will be slower, but maybe not be too bad...
Then we'd just have to introduce a basic rule that the tests in a
component run together, and can only depend on other tests run
previously in that component. It would be nice to have more
independent tests, but we'd require at least that level of independence.
-David
Re: Back to OOTB testing - Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Scott Gray wrote:
> Hi Adam,
>
> I'm no transaction expert but how sure are we that starting a new
> transaction just before each test and rolling it back at the end won't
> work? From what I can gather Derby does actually alter the database
> prior to committing the transaction but it also creates log records
> that allow the changes to undone in case of a rollback.
>
> I just tried it using the JUnitListener class to start and end a
> transaction and I can't see any obvious negative effects (aside from
> tests failing that relied on data created in previous tests).
The reason that won't work, is that some services are configured to run
in a *separate* transaction, completely separate from the one that is in
the current thread. In those cases, the current transaction is
suspended, then resumed.
To do the transaction rollback stuff in those cases, becomes rather more
complex. It's just simpler to save the disk files, and revert them all,
between tests. Just need to make certain any background threads are
restarted/shutdown.
Re: Back to OOTB testing - Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Scott Gray <le...@gmail.com>.
Hi Adam,
I'm no transaction expert but how sure are we that starting a new
transaction just before each test and rolling it back at the end won't
work? From what I can gather Derby does actually alter the database
prior to committing the transaction but it also creates log records
that allow the changes to undone in case of a rollback.
I just tried it using the JUnitListener class to start and end a
transaction and I can't see any obvious negative effects (aside from
tests failing that relied on data created in previous tests).
Regards
Scott
2008/11/14 Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>:
> David E Jones wrote:
>
>> [snip stuff about tests]
>
> On that note, it has become my primary non-paid-work concern, to make
> the automated tests work out of the box.
>
> One idea that has been mentioned, is running each test in a transaction,
> then rolling it back at the end. This won't work, for several reasons.
> One, is that tests themselves may do multiple transaction things, even
> going so far as calling services that spawn separate transactions. Two,
> if the test calls commit, it actually won't, as it's running inside
> another transaction started by the test container.
>
> Another idea that has been mentioned, is using the EntityAuditLog
> feature. Since that only deals with single fields, it would need to be
> extended.
>
> One I had this morning, is to use Entity Data xml. Whenever the new
> entity is stored, save the old entity into a per-transaction based list.
> When the transaction status changes, either throw it away, or commit
> it. This would need to be extended to support deletes.
>
> And probably the simplest of all, is to save a copy of
> runtime/data/derby, then after each test, shutdown stuff, and copy the
> files back in. Preliminary testing shows that tarring up that dir, not
> compressing, then deleting and untarring is the fastest.
>
Back to OOTB testing - Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
David E Jones wrote:
> [snip stuff about tests]
On that note, it has become my primary non-paid-work concern, to make
the automated tests work out of the box.
One idea that has been mentioned, is running each test in a transaction,
then rolling it back at the end. This won't work, for several reasons.
One, is that tests themselves may do multiple transaction things, even
going so far as calling services that spawn separate transactions. Two,
if the test calls commit, it actually won't, as it's running inside
another transaction started by the test container.
Another idea that has been mentioned, is using the EntityAuditLog
feature. Since that only deals with single fields, it would need to be
extended.
One I had this morning, is to use Entity Data xml. Whenever the new
entity is stored, save the old entity into a per-transaction based list.
When the transaction status changes, either throw it away, or commit
it. This would need to be extended to support deletes.
And probably the simplest of all, is to save a copy of
runtime/data/derby, then after each test, shutdown stuff, and copy the
files back in. Preliminary testing shows that tarring up that dir, not
compressing, then deleting and untarring is the fastest.
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
> On Nov 13, 2008, at 1:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>
>> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new features without tests).
>> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's better to have less but more robust.
>
> I don't believe I've ever been in favor of enforcing a rule requiring new features to be accompanied by automated tests. In fact,
> I think I've spoken/written against that a number of times.
I misunderstood this sentence then
<<Mobilize test contributors (testtools, selenium, etc), allow
separate people to be involved in contributing tests and contributing
features (don't require test submission, but if anyone wants something
to work in a certain way, they should submit a test for it as our
normal way of doing things)>>
This idea came also because some interesting patches are submitted without sufficient informations on how to test them.
Maybe we could suggest in "How to create a Jira issue" (contributors best practises) to put either, some or all (depending on case)
of
(bugs)
. Detailled steps to reproduce
(New features, improvements)
. Add a separate testing patch (since it's likely that they have tested on their system so they have something we don't). This is
not something we will use later, only to faster main patch test.
Any other ideas welcome here...
> Like you say, this may reduce contributions. The bigger issue with a community-driven project is that people are motivated by a
> small number of things:
>
> 1. what they or their clients need (strong)
> 2. social pressure from others in the community (semi-strong)
> 3. desire for recognition (fairly weak)
> 4. desire to create something good/new (fairly weak)
>
> A quick note on the strength of these motivations: I'm not trying to comment on human nature for all things that a person might
> do, or that would apply to all people, but I am saying that for business-oriented software developed in a community-driven model
> these seemed to be what drive actual quantities of hours and actual refinement of what is developed.
>
> So, how do we get people to contribute tests? IMO it has nothing to do with new functionality, it has everything to do with how
> people want OFBiz to work for them. In short the idea is that if someone wants something to keep working a certain way they
> should contribute an automated test for it. It's really that simple, and goes to motivation #1.
>
> To make it a stronger motivation, we can use motivation #2 as well. When people say "hey this doesn't work any more", or "it is
> important that this always work this way" the response in the mailing lists can always be "great, submit an automated test!".
>
> This allows people to invest in what they care about. Of course, to make this happen for real and not just seem like a good idea
> we need the testing tools to be as easy and consistent as possible. It needs to be easy to create tests, and it needs to be easy
> to run existing tests and to review what existing tests are and do. Those aren't easy features to implement. Because of these
> we've discussed using Selenium because it is easy to record test sequenced that test everything from the client side UI code to
> the database in and out. However, running these tests and creating suite of them that can run in an automated way that is
> organized by component still needs to be done. Even more difficult, it seems right now, is that Selenium depends on some GPL/
> LGPL libraries, so we can't include them all in OFBiz, which means that either the Selenium licensing is invalid (in the case of
> GPL libraries Selenium would have to also be GPL licensed) or at least it is much more difficult to run the tests because we
> can't include them in OFBiz.
>
> -David
Selenium looks like a deadlock for us. The team never answered my questions. I think they don't care. Like a lot of people who are
not really understanding licence issues. Actually I believe most of them are uising GPL, that's why they don't care. Maybe also they
think it's not their job, and are only interested in code.
Jacques
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On Nov 13, 2008, at 11:51 AM, Ean Schuessler wrote:
> ----- "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
>
>> I don't believe I've ever been in favor of enforcing a rule requiring
>> new features to be accompanied by automated tests. In fact, I think
>> I've spoken/written against that a number of times.
>> Like you say, this may reduce contributions. The bigger issue with a
>>
>> community-driven project is that people are motivated by a small
>> number of things:
>>
>> 1. what they or their clients need (strong)
>> 2. social pressure from others in the community (semi-strong)
>> 3. desire for recognition (fairly weak)
>> 4. desire to create something good/new (fairly weak)
>
> I don't think we should underestimate the fact that developing good
> tests is as distinct a skill set as writing good database code or
> understanding concurrent programming. One very tough problem about
> required tests would be that many people simply don't have
> experience with Selenium or any of the other test frameworks. This
> is probably especially true as you get into more rarified skill
> sets. Certainly there will be a few unusual people who feel they can
> master everything but many people tend to specialize.
Thanks Ean, that's a very good point.
> Maybe we could have testing play a more central and public role in
> the project? Try and turn testing into an area that gets you instant
> recognition? Also, maybe we can look for users that have more of an
> interest in testing (ie. customers) and get them more involved in
> core platform testing?
I'm imagining tests coming from 3 main sources:
1. people who want OFBiz to work a certain way, because that is what
they or their clients need (or want)
2. people who are just interested in QA and testing and would rather
work on that
3. those who get involved with an effort to define some requirements
and designs for OFBiz, and create automated tests according to those
(I've just started working on this, there's a new space on
docs.ofbiz.org where I'm putting stuff and I'll be writing some intro
emails about it hopefully soon, it's basically what I'm working on
today)
Especially as we get more tools in place I hope to see more pressure
on the mailing list where people are answering questions and comments
with "great, write an automated test!". I think this is along the same
lines you're thinking of. Actually, it could start right now. We have
great tools for writing service level tests, and in fact if someone
was bored they could even work on resolving some of the data
dependency problems that exist in those tests now.
Anyway, I agree. Tests need to be a more day-to-day part of the
project with recognition for having done them, and social pressure to
do them as well.
At the conference there were a bunch of people who are doing lots of
stuff based on OFBiz but have only contributed on a limited basis, or
not really at all. I was wondering if they might be interested in
participating in this way (ie for testing) and might actually be more
interested in that than in other types of contributions.
-David
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Ean Schuessler <ea...@brainfood.com>.
----- "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
> I don't believe I've ever been in favor of enforcing a rule requiring
> new features to be accompanied by automated tests. In fact, I think
> I've spoken/written against that a number of times.
> Like you say, this may reduce contributions. The bigger issue with a
>
> community-driven project is that people are motivated by a small
> number of things:
>
> 1. what they or their clients need (strong)
> 2. social pressure from others in the community (semi-strong)
> 3. desire for recognition (fairly weak)
> 4. desire to create something good/new (fairly weak)
I don't think we should underestimate the fact that developing good tests is as distinct a skill set as writing good database code or understanding concurrent programming. One very tough problem about required tests would be that many people simply don't have experience with Selenium or any of the other test frameworks. This is probably especially true as you get into more rarified skill sets. Certainly there will be a few unusual people who feel they can master everything but many people tend to specialize.
Maybe we could have testing play a more central and public role in the project? Try and turn testing into an area that gets you instant recognition? Also, maybe we can look for users that have more of an interest in testing (ie. customers) and get them more involved in core platform testing?
--
Ean Schuessler, CTO Brainfood.com
ean@brainfood.com - http://www.brainfood.com - 214-720-0700 x 315
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
On Nov 13, 2008, at 1:14 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no
> new features without tests).
> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
> better to have less but more robust.
I don't believe I've ever been in favor of enforcing a rule requiring
new features to be accompanied by automated tests. In fact, I think
I've spoken/written against that a number of times.
Like you say, this may reduce contributions. The bigger issue with a
community-driven project is that people are motivated by a small
number of things:
1. what they or their clients need (strong)
2. social pressure from others in the community (semi-strong)
3. desire for recognition (fairly weak)
4. desire to create something good/new (fairly weak)
A quick note on the strength of these motivations: I'm not trying to
comment on human nature for all things that a person might do, or that
would apply to all people, but I am saying that for business-oriented
software developed in a community-driven model these seemed to be what
drive actual quantities of hours and actual refinement of what is
developed.
So, how do we get people to contribute tests? IMO it has nothing to do
with new functionality, it has everything to do with how people want
OFBiz to work for them. In short the idea is that if someone wants
something to keep working a certain way they should contribute an
automated test for it. It's really that simple, and goes to motivation
#1.
To make it a stronger motivation, we can use motivation #2 as well.
When people say "hey this doesn't work any more", or "it is important
that this always work this way" the response in the mailing lists can
always be "great, submit an automated test!".
This allows people to invest in what they care about. Of course, to
make this happen for real and not just seem like a good idea we need
the testing tools to be as easy and consistent as possible. It needs
to be easy to create tests, and it needs to be easy to run existing
tests and to review what existing tests are and do. Those aren't easy
features to implement. Because of these we've discussed using Selenium
because it is easy to record test sequenced that test everything from
the client side UI code to the database in and out. However, running
these tests and creating suite of them that can run in an automated
way that is organized by component still needs to be done. Even more
difficult, it seems right now, is that Selenium depends on some GPL/
LGPL libraries, so we can't include them all in OFBiz, which means
that either the Selenium licensing is invalid (in the case of GPL
libraries Selenium would have to also be GPL licensed) or at least it
is much more difficult to run the tests because we can't include them
in OFBiz.
-David
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Shi Yusen <sh...@langhua.cn>.
+1 to Hudson.
在 2008-11-13四的 08:14 +0100，Jacques Le Roux写道：
> Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
> http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
> http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
>
> Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more reliable set of tests.
> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new features without tests).
> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's better to have less but more robust.
>
> I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
> >
> > Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it hosted
> > on ASF infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
> > actually an issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point
> > (ie confluence, nightly builds, demo site, etc).
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
> > On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Enrique,
> >> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
> >> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
> >> (according to David's notes).
> >>
> >> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
> >> something about.
> >> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
> >>
> >> -Bruno
> >>
> >>
> >> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hello Bruno,
> >>>
> >>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started
> >>> on your
> >>> end?
> >>>
> >>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Enrique R.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> View this message in context:
> >>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
> >>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >>>
> >>>
> >
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Ray <ra...@makeyour-point.com>.
Bug fixes usually follow the method of, if a test already exists then
you extend the test to show the bug and then you fix the bug. So from a
regression point of view you should never get hit by that bug again.
The grey area is definitely around bug fixes for code that does not have
a test. In an ideal world you would say "add a test module", but to
start with it might be to much work when the important aspect is to get
the bug fixed. But again you can develop test modules to help track down
and find a bug, if it turns out you developed more test modules than you
needed to fix the bug then the benefit is still there for the project.
Just as a reminder this does all require a test
tool/framework/environment that is easy to develop, execute and get
results from quickly, otherwise it'll be painful and won't get much support.
Ray
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> From: "Ray" <ra...@makeyour-point.com>
>> I think it is wrong to suggest you will get less contributions. Once a
>> test framework and structure is in place writing tests as you go takes
>> no longer than the development and manual test process, and often it can
>> reduce the time. I think for more people its a mind set adjustment, but
>> it means you do more structured testing at the point of development
>> rather than come back days/weeks/months later to find that obscure bug.
>
> I was playing devil's advocate to have more comments, got one elaborated
> so far, thanks Ray ! :o)
>
>> There is a transition period that will be a little bumpy as people
>> adjust but and as you say sensible decisions need to be made about what
>> contributions require a test module like new features, bug fixes,
>> enhancements etc.
>
> New features is obvious, depending on the shift, enhancements may
> require, I think bug fixes should not. But I'm newbie in Continuous
> Integration so I may be wrong.
>
> Jacques
>
>
>> Ray
>>
>>
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of
>>> Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
>>> http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
>>>
>>> Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more
>>> reliable set of tests.
>>> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new
>>> features without tests).
>>> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
>>> better to have less but more robust.
>>>
>>> I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>
>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "Ray" <ra...@makeyour-point.com>
>I think it is wrong to suggest you will get less contributions. Once a
> test framework and structure is in place writing tests as you go takes
> no longer than the development and manual test process, and often it can
> reduce the time. I think for more people its a mind set adjustment, but
> it means you do more structured testing at the point of development
> rather than come back days/weeks/months later to find that obscure bug.
I was playing devil's advocate to have more comments, got one elaborated so far, thanks Ray ! :o)
> There is a transition period that will be a little bumpy as people
> adjust but and as you say sensible decisions need to be made about what
> contributions require a test module like new features, bug fixes,
> enhancements etc.
New features is obvious, depending on the shift, enhancements may require, I think bug fixes should not. But I'm newbie in
Continuous Integration so I may be wrong.
Jacques
> Ray
>
>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of
>> Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
>> http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
>> http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
>>
>> Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more
>> reliable set of tests.
>> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new
>> features without tests).
>> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
>> better to have less but more robust.
>>
>> I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
>>
>> Jacques
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Ray <ra...@makeyour-point.com>.
I think it is wrong to suggest you will get less contributions. Once a
test framework and structure is in place writing tests as you go takes
no longer than the development and manual test process, and often it can
reduce the time. I think for more people its a mind set adjustment, but
it means you do more structured testing at the point of development
rather than come back days/weeks/months later to find that obscure bug.
There is a transition period that will be a little bumpy as people
adjust but and as you say sensible decisions need to be made about what
contributions require a test module like new features, bug fixes,
enhancements etc.
Ray
Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of
> Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
> http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
> http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
>
> Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more
> reliable set of tests.
> Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new
> features without tests).
> I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's
> better to have less but more robust.
>
> I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
>
> Jacques
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Yes and there one day hopefully we will be able to run some type of Continuous Integration. At ASF most projects use Hudson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_Integration
http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
http://wiki.apache.org/general/Hudson
Of course before that, as Adam outlined, we would have to have a more reliable set of tests.
Maybe, as David suggested, we could enforce our rules about that (no new features without tests).
I'm afraid this would drastically reduce contributions. Maybe it's better to have less but more robust.
I agree that we need marketing, and I think we need as much tests.
Jacques
From: "David E Jones" <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
> Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it hosted
> on ASF infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
> actually an issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point
> (ie confluence, nightly builds, demo site, etc).
>
> -David
>
>
> On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
>
>> Hi Enrique,
>> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
>> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
>> (according to David's notes).
>>
>> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
>> something about.
>> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
>>
>> -Bruno
>>
>>
>> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>>
>>>
>>> Hello Bruno,
>>>
>>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started
>>> on your
>>> end?
>>>
>>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Enrique R.
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>
>>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by David E Jones <da...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Actually as we get OFBiz ready to run for OFBiz we'll have it hosted
on ASF infra. The OFBiz resources that are not hosted on ASF infra are
actually an issue right now that needs to be resolved at some point
(ie confluence, nightly builds, demo site, etc).
-David
On Nov 13, 2008, at 12:13 AM, Bruno Busco wrote:
> Hi Enrique,
> I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
> Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
> (according to David's notes).
>
> I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
> something about.
> On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
>
> -Bruno
>
>
> 2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>
>>
>> Hello Bruno,
>>
>> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started
>> on your
>> end?
>>
>> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Enrique R.
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Bruno Busco <br...@gmail.com>.
Hi Enrique,
I just bumped this thread up because using OFBiz itself in place of
Confluence and even Jira has been discussed in the Apache Symposium
(according to David's notes).
I think that setting a server up and running is something HWM will do
something about.
On my end I will more than happy to help this happen and kept running.
-Bruno
2008/11/13 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>
> Hello Bruno,
>
> What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started on your
> end?
>
> How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
>
> Regards,
>
> Enrique R.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>.
Hello Bruno,
What do you have in mind?, Is there something that can be started on your
end?
How Can I help with Testing / Documenting stuff?
Regards,
Enrique R.
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p20471724.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Bruno Busco <br...@gmail.com>.
...it seems time is mature now ... ;-)
-Bruno
2008/9/15 Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
> From: "Enrique Ruibal" <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>
>> I think too that Ofbiz CMS should be leveraged to:
>>
>> - Provide Online Help to Ofbiz power users
>>
>
> Try the help button on
> https://demo.hotwaxmedia.com/projectmgr/control/main
>
> - Host the Main Ofbiz project Site in different languages
>>
>
> As always... Manpower...
>
> - Provide a separate demo site to showcase specific CMS features such as
>> visual themes and running snippets, just like already there is one for
>> ecommerce and another one for the backoffice apps.
>>
>
> Good idea, looking forward for patches ;o)
>
> Jacques
>
>
> My 2 cents.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Enrique Ruibal
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19487769.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
From: "Enrique Ruibal" <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
> I think too that Ofbiz CMS should be leveraged to:
>
> - Provide Online Help to Ofbiz power users
Try the help button on https://demo.hotwaxmedia.com/projectmgr/control/main
> - Host the Main Ofbiz project Site in different languages
As always... Manpower...
> - Provide a separate demo site to showcase specific CMS features such as
> visual themes and running snippets, just like already there is one for
> ecommerce and another one for the backoffice apps.
Good idea, looking forward for patches ;o)
Jacques
> My 2 cents.
>
> Regards,
>
> Enrique Ruibal
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19487769.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>.
I think too that Ofbiz CMS should be leveraged to:
- Provide Online Help to Ofbiz power users
- Host the Main Ofbiz project Site in different languages
- Provide a separate demo site to showcase specific CMS features such as
visual themes and running snippets, just like already there is one for
ecommerce and another one for the backoffice apps.
My 2 cents.
Regards,
Enrique Ruibal
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19487769.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Bruno Busco <br...@gmail.com>.
Thinking more on the subject...
something we could do is to have a NEW web site ofbiz-hosted intended for
(new) specific tasks.
I am thinking for example to a web site where the user contributed visual
themes can be uploaded, reviewed and tested using the selectable visual
theme feature (when it will be committed).
I am inventing nothing, I am writing about something similar to
http://themegarden.org/drupal6/
We could also go further introducing a section where code snippets are
hosted and commented.
Even an online help section could be a good subject; this could be somehow
exported and mounted in local ofbiz installation (being based on ofbiz cms
and not Confluence).
But again I feel it will be greatly beneficial that developers share an
ofbiz installation to work on, not just a demo.
I am slowly starting to use the CMS and many improvement needs jump in my
eyes but I am not sure everybody can see them because they come form a
real-world cms use.
My two cents,
-Bruno
2008/9/4 David E. Jones <jo...@hotwaxmedia.com>
>
> Not Adam Heath obviously... ;)
>
> -David
>
>
>
> BJ Freeman wrote:
>
>> Just out of curiosity, who funds all this infrastructure?
>>
>> Adam Heath sent the following on 9/3/2008 9:17 PM:
>>
>>> Christian Geisert wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bruno Busco schrieb:
>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow
>>>>> the
>>>>> standard and use their infra and tools.
>>>>>
>>>> Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence,
>>>> others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement
>>>> from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example
>>>> the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya
>>>> itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages,
>>>> see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details)
>>>>
>>> Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked.
>>>
>>> If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages,
>>> but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy
>>> your product in the first place?
>>>
>>> Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static;
>>> but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe
>>> some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even
>>> some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to
>>> *require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Hans Bakker <ma...@antwebsystems.com>.
My company, Antwebsystems.com is only (keeps us very busy) providing
services around OFBiz, no other systems, just OFBiz. How can i make my
customers clear that using OFBiz is the way to go if I am not using it
myself? Our site, customer request system(myPage,ordermgr), project
management, email, invoicing, is all run from OFBiz and we are going to
use more and more....
I also think that the main OFBiz site, ofbiz.apache.org should be run
from OFBiz, i personally think it is pretty weak if it is not.
I am prepared to make server space or development effort available to
make this possible. It would be rather nice however to run the system
from the apache servers. Also, as was suggested before, to sell Apache
and ofbiz gear from that site. I am living in Asia and can provide the
products (hats, tshirts etc) cheap.
just my 2 cents.....
Regards,
Hans Bakker
CEO Antwebsystems.com
--
Antwebsystems.com: Quality OFBiz services for competitive prices
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by "David E. Jones" <jo...@hotwaxmedia.com>.
Not Adam Heath obviously... ;)
-David
BJ Freeman wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, who funds all this infrastructure?
>
> Adam Heath sent the following on 9/3/2008 9:17 PM:
>> Christian Geisert wrote:
>>> Bruno Busco schrieb:
>>>> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
>>>> standard and use their infra and tools.
>>> Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence,
>>> others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement
>>> from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example
>>> the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya
>>> itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages,
>>> see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details)
>> Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked.
>>
>> If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages,
>> but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy
>> your product in the first place?
>>
>> Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static;
>> but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe
>> some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even
>> some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to
>> *require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane.
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by BJ Freeman <bj...@free-man.net>.
Just out of curiosity, who funds all this infrastructure?
Adam Heath sent the following on 9/3/2008 9:17 PM:
> Christian Geisert wrote:
>> Bruno Busco schrieb:
>>> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
>>> standard and use their infra and tools.
>> Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence,
>> others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement
>> from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example
>> the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya
>> itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages,
>> see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details)
>
> Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked.
>
> If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages,
> but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy
> your product in the first place?
>
> Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static;
> but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe
> some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even
> some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to
> *require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane.
>
>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Adam Heath <do...@brainfood.com>.
Christian Geisert wrote:
> Bruno Busco schrieb:
>> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
>> standard and use their infra and tools.
>
> Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence,
> others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement
> from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example
> the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya
> itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages,
> see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details)
Static? WTH? Seriously? That's fucked.
If your main product that you sell is producing dynamic database pages,
but you can't even run your own site in it, then why would I want to buy
your product in the first place?
Now, I do understand that at some volumes, you need to switch to static;
but then there should be an automated framework(oh, I don't know, maybe
some automated front-end reverse cache or something, maybe there is even
some apache software that can already do this, possibly). But to
*require* sites to *only* be static, now that's just insane.
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Christian Geisert <ch...@isu-gmbh.de>.
Bruno Busco schrieb:
> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
> standard and use their infra and tools.
Actually there is no standard - Some projects are using Confluence,
others Forrest or Anakia, some even Maven. AFAIK the only requirement
from Infra is that the actual served pages are static. For example
the Lenya project recently started to manage their website with Lenya
itself (basicly running Lenya in a zone and exporting the html pages,
see http://lenya.apache.org/docu/website-update.html for details)
--
Christian
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@hlmksw.com>.
I was planning on working on the forums section, after I finish up a few
other things.
We use the forums in-house here - I set it up as its own webapp. I would
like to get some of that code back into the project.
-Adrian
Bruno Busco wrote:
> I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
> standard and use their infra and tools.
>
> So what can we do, in order to have the OFBiz CMS more visible?
> Could we consider to have more demo data like we have for ecommerce?
> I mean, could we expand the ecommerce demo site adding several
> static/dynamic pages?
> A more real blog, some articles, a more real forum with several discussions,
> a FAQ section.
> Someone that knows how the CMS works could start adding such a structure so
> that others (including me) could add contents, text, images etc.
> Does this make sense?
> -Bruno
>
> 2008/9/1 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>
>> I checked current apache confluence version is 2.2.9 Build:#527 from Sep
>> 07,
>> 2006, and Ofbiz confluence version is 2.2.10 Build:#528 Nov 29, 2006, I
>> guess they are about the same? just curious how much difference could be.
>>
>> Enrique Ruibal
>>
>>
>>
>> David E. Jones-2 wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Enrique Ruibal wrote:
>>>> With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.orgvs.
>>>> cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for
>> apache
>>>> to
>>>> upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their
>>>> servers?
>>> That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to
>>> an older version might cause problems when
>>> exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for
>>> a significant amount of time before people
>>> eventually weed them all out.
>>>
>>> I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to
>>> update soon, but I've been thinking that for a
>>> while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know.
>>>
>>> -David
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19248525.html
>> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Bruno Busco <br...@gmail.com>.
I agree with you all that OFBiz, being part of Apache, should follow the
standard and use their infra and tools.
So what can we do, in order to have the OFBiz CMS more visible?
Could we consider to have more demo data like we have for ecommerce?
I mean, could we expand the ecommerce demo site adding several
static/dynamic pages?
A more real blog, some articles, a more real forum with several discussions,
a FAQ section.
Someone that knows how the CMS works could start adding such a structure so
that others (including me) could add contents, text, images etc.
Does this make sense?
-Bruno
2008/9/1 Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>
>
> I checked current apache confluence version is 2.2.9 Build:#527 from Sep
> 07,
> 2006, and Ofbiz confluence version is 2.2.10 Build:#528 Nov 29, 2006, I
> guess they are about the same? just curious how much difference could be.
>
> Enrique Ruibal
>
>
>
> David E. Jones-2 wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Enrique Ruibal wrote:
> >> With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.orgvs.
> >> cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for
> apache
> >> to
> >> upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their
> >> servers?
> >
> > That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to
> > an older version might cause problems when
> > exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for
> > a significant amount of time before people
> > eventually weed them all out.
> >
> > I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to
> > update soon, but I've been thinking that for a
> > while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know.
> >
> > -David
> >
> >
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19248525.html
> Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
Re: OFBiz self-hosting
Posted by Enrique Ruibal <er...@prodigy.net.mx>.
I checked current apache confluence version is 2.2.9 Build:#527 from Sep 07,
2006, and Ofbiz confluence version is 2.2.10 Build:#528 Nov 29, 2006, I
guess they are about the same? just curious how much difference could be.
Enrique Ruibal
David E. Jones-2 wrote:
>
>
>
> Enrique Ruibal wrote:
>> With regard to having different confluence versions in docs.ofbiz.org vs.
>> cwiki.apache.org does this mean that ofbiz project is waiting for apache
>> to
>> upgrade to the next release in order to make the migration to their
>> servers?
>
> That would be the best case scenario, yes. The concern is that moving to
> an older version might cause problems when
> exporting and importing the content in spaces, and may cause problems for
> a significant amount of time before people
> eventually weed them all out.
>
> I've been thinking that with such an old version they must be planning to
> update soon, but I've been thinking that for a
> while and haven't checked with infra@, so I don't really know.
>
> -David
>
>
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Idea%3A-OFBiz-self-hosting-tp19235405p19248525.html
Sent from the OFBiz - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.