Re: [2] General questions

[Jeff Mahurin <jl...@yahoo.com>]

I find it an irony, the quest to the top of the world is littered with the
defeated bodies of those who where unable to meet the final challenge.
Returning from the top of the world. That said building a website should not
be like climbing Mount Everest, always weary of the next step because you
don't know which rope someone else put out that might get you killed on the
way down more often than on the way up!

I must admit that many who venture here seem to be looking for tools that
can be reshaped. Others seem to be here looking to learn or for a
pleasurable journey, shared in good company. As for me I enjoy learning from
a well written, well organized and graphically illustrated/interesting
book/web site. These can be both relaxing, enlightening and invigorating. In
my time I have learned things we do with ease we also do with grace, and
such things soon take on a life that is vibrant and impossible to hide. This
inspires creativity and loosens the soul. 

The other side to this coin is in space no one can hear you scream because
you don't have 15 minutes to string together an obstacle course represented
by a series of laborious documents and a labyrinth of hints. 

;¬)


 

jonwimp wrote:
> 
> Andrew,
> 
> You're right. I've seen too many refactors and manhours wasted. But don't
> you often wish you had 
> programmers who could hit the ground sprinting? I guess I do have this
> problem of telling 
> everybody "you can do it, in minutes".
> 
> I think all newbies should at least try to get the ML's help to review
> methods before proceeding 
> (like I did).
> 
> Be it bottom-up or top-down learning of OFBiz, I still say OFBiz is easy
> to pick up. And once we 
> do, we'd wonder how to get on without it.
> 
> I guess, in general (to answer the "General Questions"), there really is a
> point to learn OFBiz, 
> whether it's tough or easy to learn. David wrote somewhere that OFBiz does
> try to use open source 
> tools whenever feasible. OFBiz framework is a feasible tool, far as I can
> tell. (There ARE great 
> tools out there that a quite infeasible, at least in some situations.)
> 
> And now, other less important/general stuff.
> 
> "Exhaustive study" to me equals an "evil automated language-processing
> heuristics search across 
> all OFBiz examples and templates to catch candidates possible for use".
> Yeah, I did that. Every 
> widget entity I use, I take apart that entity's insides, know how it works
> inside-out, then employ 
> it (if it's appropriate).
> 
> As for avoiding refactoring, there's always some "enough is enough" point
> where I leap off of my 
> "let's make an ultra extensible structure" pre-project project. I've
> looked at Si Chen's examples 
> of insulating codes from OFBiz core, looked at other examples outside of
> hot-deploy. Even studied 
> database transactional integrity with the various methods (eca hook-ons,
> chained requests, 
> extends, implements, etc). (Thanks especially to Jacopo and Chris Howe for
> some final-touch 
> reviews of my "methods").
> 
> So yeah, all newbies should be careful not to plunge in swimming in all
> the wrong directions. I 
> like drowning, so don't follow me. I'm not a newbie, perhaps; I'm a nobody
> gone mad. Hmm. You 
> could call David a similar nobody too (I just read his "usual approach"
> that looks like "wickedly 
> agile R&D" to me).
> 
> Jonathon
> 
> Andrew Sykes wrote:
>> Jonathon,
>> 
>> I think it's great that you found it so easy to learn, but I'd have to
>> urge caution to any newbie who thinks setting aside a time period
>> measured in minutes will be enough to get productive.
>> 
>> Generally I find the longer people study the less refactoring they find
>> themselves doing down the line.
>> 
>> Be very careful of writing code before you've undertaken an exhaustive
>> study!
>> 
>> - Andrew
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 14:20 +0800, Jonathon -- Improov wrote:
>>> Cedric,
>>>
>>>  > Jonathon, a collaboration? Yes, why not? But I am sure I will not
>>> show you
>>>  > much things because you are more experienced than me =)
>>>
>>> I started looking at OFBiz framework in Jan 07 (last month). I probably
>>> spent no more than a 
>>> week(?) on learning OFBiz framework itself; much of my time was spent on
>>> data mapping and 
>>> struggling(!!) with freeing my boss' data from legacy systems, and also
>>> on comparing OFBiz with 
>>> other solutions (he kept knocking OFBiz big-time). I had no docs, no
>>> references (save xsd 
>>> schemas), I even missed the cookbooks altogether (which really are quite
>>> skeletal, anyway).
>>>
>>> Believe me, OFBiz is easy to pick up.
>>>
>>> Somewhat exact time requirements (in case your boss asks):
>>>
>>> 1. 10 minutes to learn structure of OFBiz, so you know how to move
>>> around.
>>>
>>> 2. 1-2 minutes to look up anything related to OFBiz, since you'll be
>>> reading
>>>     OFBiz like an open REFERENCE book.
>>>
>>>  > there are questions about the use of screen/form widgets and
>>>  > Beanshell/minilang. I am not well experienced but I don't know if
>>> developers
>>>  > will like to learn these new things instead of working with what they
>>> know.
>>>
>>> As I mentioned in other threads, it IS possible to learn OFBiz inside of
>>> 10 minutes.
>>>
>>> But you could be right. IMHO, the lack of clear OFBiz framework
>>> references (not videos that are 
>>> unsearchable) may be hindering the explosive growth of the OFBiz-enabled
>>> engineer population. Also 
>>> IMHO, an explosion in the number of OFBiz-enabled engineers will likely
>>> feed back into OFBiz very 
>>> rapidly. And further IMHO, David Jones (creator of OFBiz) will then
>>> probably have a whole army of 
>>> willing volunteers to choose from (many open source projects employ
>>> ULTRA STRINGENT qualifying 
>>> criteria to screen volunteers before making them committers; you do get
>>> many top brains in open 
>>> source projects, so good that you/I probably can't ever argue with
>>> those).
>>>
>>> And finally, IMHO, I could be entirely wrong in above paragraph. I am
>>> not David Jones; I never 
>>> created an open source project myself.
>>>
>>> Bottom line. OFBiz framework is solid (may need tweaks, but enhancements
>>> are on the way all the 
>>> time). I'll be sorry if I missed it.
>>>
>>> Jonathon
>>>
>>> PRONZATO Cedric RD-BIZZ-GRE wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, you are all true! My approach is bottom-up learning. All of you
>>>> here seem to read in me like an opened book; I now know that OFBiz is a
>>>> training area for FBI Profilers. :)
>>>>
>>>> My aim (I think) was to fully understand the framework to be able to
>>>> change/replace/add new *core* functionalities and test them in a real
>>>> ecommerce environment.
>>>> Yet I never played with 'call to a service' or so as the documents
>>>> about that was enough clear. I said: All should be OK on this part.
>>>> Entity engine and Service engine are clear and in respect of all the
>>>> common and trusted laws of java development. (By the way is there any
>>>> plan to turn to the new standards? OFBiz was in advance in 2000 but now
>>>> much developer well knows Spring just to name one ...)
>>>> So after these 2 majors things there are questions about the use of
>>>> screen/form widgets and Beanshell/minilang. I am not well experienced
>>>> but I don't know if developers will like to learn these new things
>>>> instead of working with what they know. So I decided to not investigate
>>>> it much.
>>>>
>>>> Jonathon, a collaboration? Yes, why not? But I am sure I will not show
>>>> you much things because you are more experienced than me =) 
>>>> I will check about what I am allowed to do with my company policy but I
>>>> am confidant as OFBiz is a personal choice not too much tied to a
>>>> project need. I stay you tuned.
>>>>
>>>> I now have to think about what is wrong on this approach, think about
>>>> what is the next thing I have to investigate ...
>>>>
>>>> Thank you all,
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Cédric
>>>>
>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>> De : Jonathon -- Improov [mailto:jonw@improov.com] 
>>>> Envoyé : vendredi 9 février 2007 20:12
>>>> À : user@ofbiz.apache.org
>>>> Objet : Re: General questions
>>>>
>>>> Cedric,
>>>>
>>>> I get the same impression as Adrian too.
>>>>
>>>> Since you're from the R&D department, I suppose you're as much of a
>>>> freak as I am. I took apart OFBiz at the source code level too.
>>>>
>>>> Unless you're employing some language-processing heuristics in your
>>>> reverse-engineering, you'll be spending way too much time doing
>>>> brute-force studies from the bottom-up. Better to just learn from
>>>> playing with OFBiz framework (not the framework source codes), such as
>>>> service engine and entity engine, in this case.
>>>>
>>>> While it is true that learning by playing with the framework will
>>>> certainly be faster, I do admit it is not as easy as many would hope.
>>>> Technical references for working the OFBiz framework are not all in one
>>>> place, or even complete (mostly still in form of cookbooks at the
>>>> moment). Ie, there are no "javadocs equivalent" for the OFBiz
>>>> framework, except at
>>>> http://www.undersunconsulting.com/ecommerce/control/main .
>>>>
>>>> In fact, some folks here have never gotten around to using all of the
>>>> OFBiz framework. Some don't use screen/form widgets, but FTL instead.
>>>> Some use Beanshell rather than Minilang.
>>>>
>>>> I guess what I'm trying to say is this. Since you're from the R&D
>>>> department, it would be "within your scope" to learn the OFBiz
>>>> framework in any way possible, such as from studying the source codes
>>>> or playing with the framework itself. No use complaining what isn't
>>>> there; better to get things working somehow.
>>>>
>>>> For those not from the R&D department, though, then yes I do admit
>>>> OFBiz doesn't have a nice polished expensive "welcome mat/carpet" for
>>>> new users.
>>>>
>>>> If you do want to get help learning the OFBiz framework, you can either
>>>> work with me and write down all that I've discovered through my own
>>>> reverse-engineering, or you can employ some of the experts here to
>>>> teach you. I'll have to train some staff on OFBiz before I sign off my
>>>> current project, so your help here would be much appreciated.
>>>>
>>>> Hope you enjoy OFBiz as much as I have. :)
>>>>
>>>> Jonathon
>>>>
>>>> Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>> Cedric,
>>>>>
>>>>> I might be wrong, but I get the impression you are trying to approach 
>>>>> OFBiz from the bottom up (examining java classes versus examining 
>>>>> higher-level layers). I made that mistake when I first got involved 
>>>>> with OFBiz.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be better to look at things like the service engine, entity 
>>>>> engine, screen widgets, etc. Get an idea of how the presentation layer 
>>>>> works, then work your way down to the service layer, then down to the 
>>>>> database schema, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Typically, the only reason anyone would want to get into the java 
>>>>> source would be to fix a bug or make a modification at a very low 
>>>>> level of the architecture "stack."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> PRONZATO Cedric RD-BIZZ-GRE wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Re,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes you are true but I think I didn't explained myself.
>>>>>> These questions may have been answered in the javadocs. I am sure you 
>>>>>> know (you that architects of OFBiz) why you decided to make a 
>>>>>> Container class and so on.
>>>>>> So perhaps a little enhancement of javadoc on foundation classes to 
>>>>>> explain why and where to use it would be so nice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope I do not look like too much arrogant with my questions on that 
>>>>>> thread "General questions"; I just expose the problems I was faced
>>>>>> to.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Cédric
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Message d'origine-----
>>>>>> De : David E. Jones [mailto:jonesde@hotwaxmedia.com] Envoyé : 
>>>>>> vendredi
>>>>>> 9 février 2007 18:12
>>>>>> À : user@ofbiz.apache.org
>>>>>> Objet : Re: General questions
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2007, at 9:12 AM, PRONZATO Cedric RD-BIZZ-GRE wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A related problem is how to do "framework" components, I mean 
>>>>>>> patterns. I think about my SMSC component, I base my code on the 
>>>>>>> mail container and questions arised:
>>>>>>> - When do I have to make my own xml language (ie. MCA for the mail 
>>>>>>> container)?
>>>>>>> - When do I have to make a Container? I guess the answer is if you 
>>>>>>> have to manage the lifetime (create/release connections, ...).
>>>>>>> - When do I have to make an Engine?
>>>>>>> - ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I guess we can finish with the following statement: "How to
>>>>>>> *use* is quite well documented but how to *make* is a bit less".
>>>>>> Have you ever found such a document for anything?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My usual approach is generally something like:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. understand everything that exists, or research anything that is 
>>>>>> unclear 2. write something manually a number of times so you know 
>>>>>> what is always the same, and what varies 3. see if a paramerized tool 
>>>>>> would be helpful 4. apply a significant amount of "genius"
>>>>>> 5. apply even more "sweat" to try stuff 6. create an incredible tool 
>>>>>> or service or however it is best implemented
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If there was a way to make creation deterministic, what would be the 
>>>>>> point of creativity?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/General-questions-tf3199396.html#a8960121
Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.