dependencies too deep rooted?

[Christopher Snow <sn...@snowconsulting.co.uk>]

I'm starting to get the impression that the dependencies from framework 
to applications are too deep rooted.  I was originally hoping to be able 
to move the dependencies around so that users could switch between a 
standalone framework and a full ofbiz just by commenting/uncommenting 
component-load.xml.  However, currently there are too main dependencies 
on applications.  I think the only way to separate the dependency from 
framework to applications is by some pretty heavy refactoring.

I have managed to get a standalone framework - but only by some pretty 
big hacks.

The functionality I have got running ok so far:

- Login
- Theme
- Security Group management (functionality from Party component)
- Help
- Webtools

Functionality that is not working

- Portal
- Themes not selectable

Functionality that needs developing

- CrUD screens for UserLogin


I've managed to break svn so I can't do a diff, but if anyone would like 
a download of my eclipse project (90MB), please let me know.

Many thanks,

Chris

Re: dependencies too deep rooted?

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

I for one, think that it would be well worth the time and effort to make this happen - and Chris, if you have the time to help define these mods that need to help, I'll help to put the resources behind getting it done.   We need to keep this level of separation in place - it enforces better practices and makes the code we write higher quality. 

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Feb 25, 2010, at 6:26 PM, David E Jones wrote:

> 
> Chris,
> 
> The was possible at one point, and a few years ago I did get it to the point where you could delete the applications directory (or comment out the component load) and start up just the framework.
> 
> However, the community has exploded since then and for many framework separation has been a lower priority, and many have also not understood the whole concept (thinking that soft-reference were fine, but they're not if things won't run without the soft-referred to artifact existing).
> 
> So yes, at this point (as many people have said in feedback to you) this would require a fair amount of effort. What's more, it would break a lot of backward compatibility to make these changes and with so many changes you would have to be REALLY determined and patient with all of the complains and personal attacks you're likely to get.
> 
> I personally think it's well worth doing, but I also personally know that I don't have the resources to push and see it through (as with many people... I have higher priorities).
> 
> Seriously though, that's all it would take: time and effort.
> 
> -David
> 
> 
> On Feb 25, 2010, at 6:11 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:
> 
>> I'm starting to get the impression that the dependencies from framework to applications are too deep rooted.  I was originally hoping to be able to move the dependencies around so that users could switch between a standalone framework and a full ofbiz just by commenting/uncommenting component-load.xml.  However, currently there are too main dependencies on applications.  I think the only way to separate the dependency from framework to applications is by some pretty heavy refactoring.
>> 
>> I have managed to get a standalone framework - but only by some pretty big hacks.
>> 
>> The functionality I have got running ok so far:
>> 
>> - Login
>> - Theme
>> - Security Group management (functionality from Party component)
>> - Help
>> - Webtools
>> 
>> Functionality that is not working
>> 
>> - Portal
>> - Themes not selectable
>> 
>> Functionality that needs developing
>> 
>> - CrUD screens for UserLogin
>> 
>> 
>> I've managed to break svn so I can't do a diff, but if anyone would like a download of my eclipse project (90MB), please let me know.
>> 
>> Many thanks,
>> 
>> Chris
> 

Re: dependencies too deep rooted?

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

Chris,

The was possible at one point, and a few years ago I did get it to the point where you could delete the applications directory (or comment out the component load) and start up just the framework.

However, the community has exploded since then and for many framework separation has been a lower priority, and many have also not understood the whole concept (thinking that soft-reference were fine, but they're not if things won't run without the soft-referred to artifact existing).

So yes, at this point (as many people have said in feedback to you) this would require a fair amount of effort. What's more, it would break a lot of backward compatibility to make these changes and with so many changes you would have to be REALLY determined and patient with all of the complains and personal attacks you're likely to get.

I personally think it's well worth doing, but I also personally know that I don't have the resources to push and see it through (as with many people... I have higher priorities).

Seriously though, that's all it would take: time and effort.

-David


On Feb 25, 2010, at 6:11 PM, Christopher Snow wrote:

> I'm starting to get the impression that the dependencies from framework to applications are too deep rooted.  I was originally hoping to be able to move the dependencies around so that users could switch between a standalone framework and a full ofbiz just by commenting/uncommenting component-load.xml.  However, currently there are too main dependencies on applications.  I think the only way to separate the dependency from framework to applications is by some pretty heavy refactoring.
> 
> I have managed to get a standalone framework - but only by some pretty big hacks.
> 
> The functionality I have got running ok so far:
> 
> - Login
> - Theme
> - Security Group management (functionality from Party component)
> - Help
> - Webtools
> 
> Functionality that is not working
> 
> - Portal
> - Themes not selectable
> 
> Functionality that needs developing
> 
> - CrUD screens for UserLogin
> 
> 
> I've managed to break svn so I can't do a diff, but if anyone would like a download of my eclipse project (90MB), please let me know.
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Chris

Re: dependencies too deep rooted?

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

--- On Thu, 2/25/10, Christopher Snow <sn...@snowconsulting.co.uk> wrote:
> I'm starting to get the impression
> that the dependencies from framework to applications are too
> deep rooted.

I think it depends on how big you want the framework to be. Maybe if you scale back how much is included in the framework, the task will become more manageable.

> I was originally hoping to be able to
> move the dependencies around so that users could switch
> between a standalone framework and a full ofbiz just by
> commenting/uncommenting component-load.xml.

That's one way of looking at it. The end result I have pictured in my mind is a jar file you can download and build upon. A lot of the stuff found in the current framework folder could be added on separately.

> Functionality that needs developing
> 
> - CrUD screens for UserLogin

Maybe you should tackle that first - bite off a smaller piece to chew on. Just work on getting the security-related stuff moved from Party Manager to the framework. (I started working on that myself, but I had to move on to other things - look in Jira.)

Try taking smaller steps. Divide and conquer. Don't give up.

-Adrian