You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com> on 2015/03/24 07:49:45 UTC
OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re: Passport
Component for OAuth2)
Hi All, Gavin,
Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of enterprise
processes that includes framework components and business applications for
ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship Management),
E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP (Manufacturing
Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise Asset
Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes most
applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also states:
Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to implement
your most challenging business needs.
Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
proposition is.
Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything coming
from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of a
framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
setup and I don't want any excess'.?
And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do project
mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get that +
accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce (plus a
whole lot more)
And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that potential
customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I don't
need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I leave
it in, who knows what it will do.
Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
(framework components, some components in applications). The rest are just
layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz Value
Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
what is it? What is yours?
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
> Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
>
>> Hi Pierre
>>
>> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa application.
>>
>>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
>>>
>>
>> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
>> hypothetical scenario:
>>
>> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
>> - 3rd Party HR;
>> - 3rd Party SFA;
>> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
>> - 3rd Party CMS;
>> - etc
>>
>> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are core
>> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
>>
>
> Good point Gavin :D
>
> Jacques
>
>
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
Thank you, Adrian, for sharing your viewpoint.
Op dinsdag 24 maart 2015 heeft Adrian Crum <
adrian.crum@sandglass-software.com> het volgende geschreven:
> On 3/24/2015 1:16 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
>
>> In the past statements have been made that contributors must have certain
>> traits shown before they can be considered committer grade by the PMC.
>> Those statements came down to: the potential must be/have the same as the
>> existing! The same qualities and skills as the existing have. And the
>> implied reasoning behind it was: if they are not the same they can't be
>> trusted with our commits, they wreck the code and project.
>>
>
>
> This is nonsense. Contributions are reviewed by committers and each
> evaluation is based on their experience with the project. It has nothing to
> do with the person, it has everything to do with code quality.
>
> Please stop with the paranoid rants.
>
>
> Adrian Crum
> Sandglass Software
> www.sandglass-software.com
>
--
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re: Passport
Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Adrian Crum <ad...@sandglass-software.com>.
On 3/24/2015 1:16 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> In the past statements have been made that contributors must have certain
> traits shown before they can be considered committer grade by the PMC.
> Those statements came down to: the potential must be/have the same as the
> existing! The same qualities and skills as the existing have. And the
> implied reasoning behind it was: if they are not the same they can't be
> trusted with our commits, they wreck the code and project.
This is nonsense. Contributions are reviewed by committers and each
evaluation is based on their experience with the project. It has nothing
to do with the person, it has everything to do with code quality.
Please stop with the paranoid rants.
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com>.
Agree with most of the ideas expressed.
On 24 Mar 2015 3:17 PM, "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Miscellaneous is just another classification, for sure worse than 'special
> purpose'.
>
> Yes, some got more love in the past by the committers at that time (some
> left). It is a given that each contributor (and committers are
> contributors) has the freedom to work on what he/she desires to work on.
> We, the community as a whole and thus each of, can not direct that. We can
> only ask for commitment. Through JIRA issues, through plans.
>
> And foremost the commitment should be/is towards the project. That is not
> commitment to a specific application or component. Although it is ok with
> me if a few contributors (committers) would say that they focusses on e.g.
> humanres, or documentation. Such statements are good, because then the
> community knows to whom to turn to in the case of questions and/or
> suggestions for improvement. And our project (in terms of diversity in
> works) is large enough to enable such specialisation. A project can never
> have something as to many contributors and committers.
>
> In the past statements have been made that contributors must have certain
> traits shown before they can be considered committer grade by the PMC.
> Those statements came down to: the potential must be/have the same as the
> existing! The same qualities and skills as the existing have. And the
> implied reasoning behind it was: if they are not the same they can't be
> trusted with our commits, they wreck the code and project.
>
> Yet, given the diversity of the works there should be room in the project
> to have the same diversity in its committer base. And more than just 1 per
> focus area (documentation, specific apps, etc). So that in each area the
> workload can be shared, etc.
>
> More committers leads to more contributions persisted (in code/descriptive
> pages), more bugs fixed, more improvements implemented. Leading to a better
> documentation, to more adoption. It also leads to more scrutiny, more
> reflection on having the right thing in at the right time, in stead of
> being fast and having to do the do-over.
>
> We all don't have to be same. We just have to have understanding of the
> position of the other and collaborate. The project is large enough for
> more.
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Gavin,
> >
> > As we do cloud based multi-tenancy, almost everything we have in our
> value
> > proposition is special purpose (it is just a classifaction). It depends
> on
> > use within the domains of the customer. And we have movedl from the
> special
> > purpose folder to more appropriate places (ldap to framework, most to
> > hot-deploy) and have much more configurability.
> >
> > What we try to avoid as much as possible is to expose the base registers
> > (apps like ordermgr, partymgr, workeffort) to users, because these either
> > so overcrowded with clickables (partymgr) that they deliver the opposite
> of
> > a good user experience, or they are so basic in user functionality that
> > they aren't worth exposing (workeffort).
> >
> > For others we have our own additions/replacements.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > Services and Retail & Trade
> > http://www.orrtiz.com
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Pierre
> >>
> >> I'm not sure where we're going with this discussion. My original input
> was
> >> to suggest that OAuth2 might not fit into the "special purpose" category
> >> and that it should rather be considered a tool/utility. As it
> transpires,
> >> there seems to be divergent opinions (at least between you and me) as to
> >> what "special purpose" in fact is. Frankly, this is a moot point with
> its
> >> relevance perhaps limited to how the project (Ofbiz) presents the
> system.
> >> The system is flexible enough for developers to place application
> >> components into folders as they wish. A developer might well decide to
> >> place manufacturing in the "special purpose" folder. Nothing wrong with
> >> that.
> >>
> >> However ,the theme that emerges from this and other discussions on the
> >> topic is that the "special purpose" folder is at times viewed as a
> folder
> >> for miscellaneous. Miscellaneous in this instance includes components
> that
> >> are (a) not well supported in terms of committer contributions and (b)
> >> where there is a perceived better alternative in the open source market.
> >> My initial point was simply that we, from a project point of view,
> should
> >> have some clarity as to how we categorise components.There are
> references
> >> on the Ofbiz wiki to "special purpose" components as "process-or
> >> role-oriented
> >> <
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Announcement+for+new+release+Apache+OFBiz+09.04.01
> >> >".
> >> There is also reference to the requirement that "special purpose"
> >> components should not be interdependent
> >> <
> >>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> >> >.
> >> I agree with both points, but I must add that to use it for "all-else"
> >> would not be well-founded/well thought-through.
> >>
> >> More directly to some of your specific questions:
> >>
> >> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> >> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my
> manufacturing
> >> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
> >>
> >> 1. Firstly,I would be elated that the customer "wants" Ofbiz in the
> first
> >> place.
> >> 2. Secondly, I would inquire as to why the customer only wants Ofbiz's
> >> manufacturing functionality?
> >> Responses to this question will undoubtedly be interesting - but its
> >> certainly an opportunity for up-selling the system as a whole.
> >>
> >> I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that.
> And
> >> > what is it? What is yours?
> >>
> >> Shortly, OOTB Ofbiz's biggest value is that, as a business process
> >> management system, it provides an organisation with the software to
> manage
> >> business functions through an integrated set of applications built on
> >> robust open source technologies. Just my opinion.
> >>
> >> Hope I wasn't too long-winded.
> >>
> >> Gavin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi All, Gavin,
> >> >
> >> > Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
> >> >
> >> > Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
> >> >
> >> > Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of
> enterprise
> >> > processes that includes framework components and business applications
> >> for
> >> > ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship
> >> Management),
> >> > E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP
> >> (Manufacturing
> >> > Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise
> >> Asset
> >> > Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes
> >> most
> >> > applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also
> states:
> >> >
> >> > Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to
> >> implement
> >> > your most challenging business needs.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
> >> > proposition is.
> >> >
> >> > Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
> >> > hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything
> >> coming
> >> > from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of
> a
> >> > framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
> >> >
> >> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> >> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my
> manufacturing
> >> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
> >> >
> >> > And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
> >> > download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
> >> >
> >> > And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do
> >> project
> >> > mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
> >> >
> >> > That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get
> that
> >> +
> >> > accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
> >> > solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce
> (plus
> >> a
> >> > whole lot more)
> >> >
> >> > And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that
> >> potential
> >> > customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I
> >> don't
> >> > need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I
> >> leave
> >> > it in, who knows what it will do.
> >> >
> >> > Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
> >> > (framework components, some components in applications). The rest are
> >> just
> >> > layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz
> Value
> >> > Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
> >> >
> >> > I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that.
> >> And
> >> > what is it? What is yours?
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> >
> >> > Pierre Smits
> >> >
> >> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> >> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> >> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> >> > Services and Retail & Trade
> >> > http://www.orrtiz.com
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> >> > jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> >> > >
> >> > >> Hi Pierre
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa
> >> > application.
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
> >> > >> hypothetical scenario:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
> >> > >> - 3rd Party HR;
> >> > >> - 3rd Party SFA;
> >> > >> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
> >> > >> - 3rd Party CMS;
> >> > >> - etc
> >> > >>
> >> > >> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are
> core
> >> > >> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > > Good point Gavin :D
> >> > >
> >> > > Jacques
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
Miscellaneous is just another classification, for sure worse than 'special
purpose'.
Yes, some got more love in the past by the committers at that time (some
left). It is a given that each contributor (and committers are
contributors) has the freedom to work on what he/she desires to work on.
We, the community as a whole and thus each of, can not direct that. We can
only ask for commitment. Through JIRA issues, through plans.
And foremost the commitment should be/is towards the project. That is not
commitment to a specific application or component. Although it is ok with
me if a few contributors (committers) would say that they focusses on e.g.
humanres, or documentation. Such statements are good, because then the
community knows to whom to turn to in the case of questions and/or
suggestions for improvement. And our project (in terms of diversity in
works) is large enough to enable such specialisation. A project can never
have something as to many contributors and committers.
In the past statements have been made that contributors must have certain
traits shown before they can be considered committer grade by the PMC.
Those statements came down to: the potential must be/have the same as the
existing! The same qualities and skills as the existing have. And the
implied reasoning behind it was: if they are not the same they can't be
trusted with our commits, they wreck the code and project.
Yet, given the diversity of the works there should be room in the project
to have the same diversity in its committer base. And more than just 1 per
focus area (documentation, specific apps, etc). So that in each area the
workload can be shared, etc.
More committers leads to more contributions persisted (in code/descriptive
pages), more bugs fixed, more improvements implemented. Leading to a better
documentation, to more adoption. It also leads to more scrutiny, more
reflection on having the right thing in at the right time, in stead of
being fast and having to do the do-over.
We all don't have to be same. We just have to have understanding of the
position of the other and collaborate. The project is large enough for more.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Gavin,
>
> As we do cloud based multi-tenancy, almost everything we have in our value
> proposition is special purpose (it is just a classifaction). It depends on
> use within the domains of the customer. And we have movedl from the special
> purpose folder to more appropriate places (ldap to framework, most to
> hot-deploy) and have much more configurability.
>
> What we try to avoid as much as possible is to expose the base registers
> (apps like ordermgr, partymgr, workeffort) to users, because these either
> so overcrowded with clickables (partymgr) that they deliver the opposite of
> a good user experience, or they are so basic in user functionality that
> they aren't worth exposing (workeffort).
>
> For others we have our own additions/replacements.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Pierre
>>
>> I'm not sure where we're going with this discussion. My original input was
>> to suggest that OAuth2 might not fit into the "special purpose" category
>> and that it should rather be considered a tool/utility. As it transpires,
>> there seems to be divergent opinions (at least between you and me) as to
>> what "special purpose" in fact is. Frankly, this is a moot point with its
>> relevance perhaps limited to how the project (Ofbiz) presents the system.
>> The system is flexible enough for developers to place application
>> components into folders as they wish. A developer might well decide to
>> place manufacturing in the "special purpose" folder. Nothing wrong with
>> that.
>>
>> However ,the theme that emerges from this and other discussions on the
>> topic is that the "special purpose" folder is at times viewed as a folder
>> for miscellaneous. Miscellaneous in this instance includes components that
>> are (a) not well supported in terms of committer contributions and (b)
>> where there is a perceived better alternative in the open source market.
>> My initial point was simply that we, from a project point of view, should
>> have some clarity as to how we categorise components.There are references
>> on the Ofbiz wiki to "special purpose" components as "process-or
>> role-oriented
>> <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Announcement+for+new+release+Apache+OFBiz+09.04.01
>> >".
>> There is also reference to the requirement that "special purpose"
>> components should not be interdependent
>> <
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
>> >.
>> I agree with both points, but I must add that to use it for "all-else"
>> would not be well-founded/well thought-through.
>>
>> More directly to some of your specific questions:
>>
>> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
>> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
>> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
>>
>> 1. Firstly,I would be elated that the customer "wants" Ofbiz in the first
>> place.
>> 2. Secondly, I would inquire as to why the customer only wants Ofbiz's
>> manufacturing functionality?
>> Responses to this question will undoubtedly be interesting - but its
>> certainly an opportunity for up-selling the system as a whole.
>>
>> I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
>> > what is it? What is yours?
>>
>> Shortly, OOTB Ofbiz's biggest value is that, as a business process
>> management system, it provides an organisation with the software to manage
>> business functions through an integrated set of applications built on
>> robust open source technologies. Just my opinion.
>>
>> Hope I wasn't too long-winded.
>>
>> Gavin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi All, Gavin,
>> >
>> > Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
>> >
>> >
>> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
>> >
>> > Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
>> >
>> > Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of enterprise
>> > processes that includes framework components and business applications
>> for
>> > ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship
>> Management),
>> > E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP
>> (Manufacturing
>> > Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise
>> Asset
>> > Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
>> >
>> >
>> > That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes
>> most
>> > applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also states:
>> >
>> > Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to
>> implement
>> > your most challenging business needs.
>> >
>> >
>> > Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
>> > proposition is.
>> >
>> > Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
>> > hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything
>> coming
>> > from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of a
>> > framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
>> >
>> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
>> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
>> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
>> >
>> > And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
>> > download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
>> >
>> > And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do
>> project
>> > mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
>> >
>> > That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get that
>> +
>> > accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
>> > solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce (plus
>> a
>> > whole lot more)
>> >
>> > And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that
>> potential
>> > customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I
>> don't
>> > need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I
>> leave
>> > it in, who knows what it will do.
>> >
>> > Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
>> > (framework components, some components in applications). The rest are
>> just
>> > layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz Value
>> > Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
>> >
>> > I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that.
>> And
>> > what is it? What is yours?
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > Pierre Smits
>> >
>> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
>> > Services and Retail & Trade
>> > http://www.orrtiz.com
>> >
>> > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
>> > jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
>> > >
>> > >> Hi Pierre
>> > >>
>> > >> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa
>> > application.
>> > >>
>> > >>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
>> > >> hypothetical scenario:
>> > >>
>> > >> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
>> > >> - 3rd Party HR;
>> > >> - 3rd Party SFA;
>> > >> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
>> > >> - 3rd Party CMS;
>> > >> - etc
>> > >>
>> > >> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are core
>> > >> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > Good point Gavin :D
>> > >
>> > > Jacques
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com>.
Sounds like a good idea. ;-)
On 24 Mar 2015 2:30 PM, "Pierre Smits" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gavin,
>
> As we do cloud based multi-tenancy, almost everything we have in our value
> proposition is special purpose (it is just a classifaction). It depends on
> use within the domains of the customer. And we have movedl from the special
> purpose folder to more appropriate places (ldap to framework, most to
> hot-deploy) and have much more configurability.
>
> What we try to avoid as much as possible is to expose the base registers
> (apps like ordermgr, partymgr, workeffort) to users, because these either
> so overcrowded with clickables (partymgr) that they deliver the opposite of
> a good user experience, or they are so basic in user functionality that
> they aren't worth exposing (workeffort).
>
> For others we have our own additions/replacements.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Pierre
> >
> > I'm not sure where we're going with this discussion. My original input
> was
> > to suggest that OAuth2 might not fit into the "special purpose" category
> > and that it should rather be considered a tool/utility. As it
> transpires,
> > there seems to be divergent opinions (at least between you and me) as to
> > what "special purpose" in fact is. Frankly, this is a moot point with its
> > relevance perhaps limited to how the project (Ofbiz) presents the system.
> > The system is flexible enough for developers to place application
> > components into folders as they wish. A developer might well decide to
> > place manufacturing in the "special purpose" folder. Nothing wrong with
> > that.
> >
> > However ,the theme that emerges from this and other discussions on the
> > topic is that the "special purpose" folder is at times viewed as a folder
> > for miscellaneous. Miscellaneous in this instance includes components
> that
> > are (a) not well supported in terms of committer contributions and (b)
> > where there is a perceived better alternative in the open source market.
> > My initial point was simply that we, from a project point of view, should
> > have some clarity as to how we categorise components.There are references
> > on the Ofbiz wiki to "special purpose" components as "process-or
> > role-oriented
> > <
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Announcement+for+new+release+Apache+OFBiz+09.04.01
> > >".
> > There is also reference to the requirement that "special purpose"
> > components should not be interdependent
> > <
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> > >.
> > I agree with both points, but I must add that to use it for "all-else"
> > would not be well-founded/well thought-through.
> >
> > More directly to some of your specific questions:
> >
> > > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> > > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my
> manufacturing
> > > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
> >
> > 1. Firstly,I would be elated that the customer "wants" Ofbiz in the first
> > place.
> > 2. Secondly, I would inquire as to why the customer only wants Ofbiz's
> > manufacturing functionality?
> > Responses to this question will undoubtedly be interesting - but its
> > certainly an opportunity for up-selling the system as a whole.
> >
> > I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> > > what is it? What is yours?
> >
> > Shortly, OOTB Ofbiz's biggest value is that, as a business process
> > management system, it provides an organisation with the software to
> manage
> > business functions through an integrated set of applications built on
> > robust open source technologies. Just my opinion.
> >
> > Hope I wasn't too long-winded.
> >
> > Gavin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All, Gavin,
> > >
> > > Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
> > >
> > > Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
> > >
> > > Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of
> enterprise
> > > processes that includes framework components and business applications
> > for
> > > ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship
> > Management),
> > > E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP
> > (Manufacturing
> > > Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise
> > Asset
> > > Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
> > >
> > >
> > > That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes
> most
> > > applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also states:
> > >
> > > Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to
> implement
> > > your most challenging business needs.
> > >
> > >
> > > Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
> > > proposition is.
> > >
> > > Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
> > > hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything
> > coming
> > > from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of a
> > > framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
> > >
> > > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> > > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my
> manufacturing
> > > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
> > >
> > > And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
> > > download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
> > >
> > > And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do
> project
> > > mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
> > >
> > > That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get
> that +
> > > accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
> > > solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce
> (plus a
> > > whole lot more)
> > >
> > > And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that
> > potential
> > > customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I
> don't
> > > need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I
> > leave
> > > it in, who knows what it will do.
> > >
> > > Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
> > > (framework components, some components in applications). The rest are
> > just
> > > layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz
> Value
> > > Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
> > >
> > > I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that.
> And
> > > what is it? What is yours?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Pierre Smits
> > >
> > > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > > Services and Retail & Trade
> > > http://www.orrtiz.com
> > >
> > > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > > jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Pierre
> > > >>
> > > >> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa
> > > application.
> > > >>
> > > >>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
> > > >> hypothetical scenario:
> > > >>
> > > >> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
> > > >> - 3rd Party HR;
> > > >> - 3rd Party SFA;
> > > >> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
> > > >> - 3rd Party CMS;
> > > >> - etc
> > > >>
> > > >> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are
> core
> > > >> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Good point Gavin :D
> > > >
> > > > Jacques
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
Gavin,
As we do cloud based multi-tenancy, almost everything we have in our value
proposition is special purpose (it is just a classifaction). It depends on
use within the domains of the customer. And we have movedl from the special
purpose folder to more appropriate places (ldap to framework, most to
hot-deploy) and have much more configurability.
What we try to avoid as much as possible is to expose the base registers
(apps like ordermgr, partymgr, workeffort) to users, because these either
so overcrowded with clickables (partymgr) that they deliver the opposite of
a good user experience, or they are so basic in user functionality that
they aren't worth exposing (workeffort).
For others we have our own additions/replacements.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Pierre
>
> I'm not sure where we're going with this discussion. My original input was
> to suggest that OAuth2 might not fit into the "special purpose" category
> and that it should rather be considered a tool/utility. As it transpires,
> there seems to be divergent opinions (at least between you and me) as to
> what "special purpose" in fact is. Frankly, this is a moot point with its
> relevance perhaps limited to how the project (Ofbiz) presents the system.
> The system is flexible enough for developers to place application
> components into folders as they wish. A developer might well decide to
> place manufacturing in the "special purpose" folder. Nothing wrong with
> that.
>
> However ,the theme that emerges from this and other discussions on the
> topic is that the "special purpose" folder is at times viewed as a folder
> for miscellaneous. Miscellaneous in this instance includes components that
> are (a) not well supported in terms of committer contributions and (b)
> where there is a perceived better alternative in the open source market.
> My initial point was simply that we, from a project point of view, should
> have some clarity as to how we categorise components.There are references
> on the Ofbiz wiki to "special purpose" components as "process-or
> role-oriented
> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Announcement+for+new+release+Apache+OFBiz+09.04.01
> >".
> There is also reference to the requirement that "special purpose"
> components should not be interdependent
> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> >.
> I agree with both points, but I must add that to use it for "all-else"
> would not be well-founded/well thought-through.
>
> More directly to some of your specific questions:
>
> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
>
> 1. Firstly,I would be elated that the customer "wants" Ofbiz in the first
> place.
> 2. Secondly, I would inquire as to why the customer only wants Ofbiz's
> manufacturing functionality?
> Responses to this question will undoubtedly be interesting - but its
> certainly an opportunity for up-selling the system as a whole.
>
> I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> > what is it? What is yours?
>
> Shortly, OOTB Ofbiz's biggest value is that, as a business process
> management system, it provides an organisation with the software to manage
> business functions through an integrated set of applications built on
> robust open source technologies. Just my opinion.
>
> Hope I wasn't too long-winded.
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All, Gavin,
> >
> > Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
> >
> >
> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
> >
> > Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
> >
> > Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of enterprise
> > processes that includes framework components and business applications
> for
> > ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship
> Management),
> > E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP
> (Manufacturing
> > Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise
> Asset
> > Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
> >
> >
> > That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes most
> > applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also states:
> >
> > Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to implement
> > your most challenging business needs.
> >
> >
> > Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
> > proposition is.
> >
> > Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
> > hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything
> coming
> > from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of a
> > framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
> >
> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
> >
> > And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
> > download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
> >
> > And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do project
> > mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
> >
> > That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get that +
> > accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
> > solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce (plus a
> > whole lot more)
> >
> > And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that
> potential
> > customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I don't
> > need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I
> leave
> > it in, who knows what it will do.
> >
> > Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
> > (framework components, some components in applications). The rest are
> just
> > layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz Value
> > Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
> >
> > I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> > what is it? What is yours?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > Services and Retail & Trade
> > http://www.orrtiz.com
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Hi Pierre
> > >>
> > >> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa
> > application.
> > >>
> > >>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
> > >> hypothetical scenario:
> > >>
> > >> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
> > >> - 3rd Party HR;
> > >> - 3rd Party SFA;
> > >> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
> > >> - 3rd Party CMS;
> > >> - etc
> > >>
> > >> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are core
> > >> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Good point Gavin :D
> > >
> > > Jacques
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
That is why I started a new thread. To stop diluting the original intent of
that thread.
I agree, we should clarify more. We should start with that in web/wiki
pages per component (and per app if there are multiples in a component -
see issue OFBIZ-5838 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5838>).
And then we should follow up with how the proposed feature set (components
+ apps, required vs optional) could be given the specific target users in
sectors and verticals (e.g. Trade - wholesale vs retail, Manufacturing -
without ecommerce vs with, Professional services).
And then you'll see very quickly what the mandatories and optionals will be.
As for these optionals are placed, it shouldn't be an issue.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Pierre
>
> I'm not sure where we're going with this discussion. My original input was
> to suggest that OAuth2 might not fit into the "special purpose" category
> and that it should rather be considered a tool/utility. As it transpires,
> there seems to be divergent opinions (at least between you and me) as to
> what "special purpose" in fact is. Frankly, this is a moot point with its
> relevance perhaps limited to how the project (Ofbiz) presents the system.
> The system is flexible enough for developers to place application
> components into folders as they wish. A developer might well decide to
> place manufacturing in the "special purpose" folder. Nothing wrong with
> that.
>
> However ,the theme that emerges from this and other discussions on the
> topic is that the "special purpose" folder is at times viewed as a folder
> for miscellaneous. Miscellaneous in this instance includes components that
> are (a) not well supported in terms of committer contributions and (b)
> where there is a perceived better alternative in the open source market.
> My initial point was simply that we, from a project point of view, should
> have some clarity as to how we categorise components.There are references
> on the Ofbiz wiki to "special purpose" components as "process-or
> role-oriented
> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Announcement+for+new+release+Apache+OFBiz+09.04.01
> >".
> There is also reference to the requirement that "special purpose"
> components should not be interdependent
> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies
> >.
> I agree with both points, but I must add that to use it for "all-else"
> would not be well-founded/well thought-through.
>
> More directly to some of your specific questions:
>
> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
>
> 1. Firstly,I would be elated that the customer "wants" Ofbiz in the first
> place.
> 2. Secondly, I would inquire as to why the customer only wants Ofbiz's
> manufacturing functionality?
> Responses to this question will undoubtedly be interesting - but its
> certainly an opportunity for up-selling the system as a whole.
>
> I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> > what is it? What is yours?
>
> Shortly, OOTB Ofbiz's biggest value is that, as a business process
> management system, it provides an organisation with the software to manage
> business functions through an integrated set of applications built on
> robust open source technologies. Just my opinion.
>
> Hope I wasn't too long-winded.
>
> Gavin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All, Gavin,
> >
> > Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
> >
> >
> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
> >
> > Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
> >
> > Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of enterprise
> > processes that includes framework components and business applications
> for
> > ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship
> Management),
> > E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP
> (Manufacturing
> > Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise
> Asset
> > Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
> >
> >
> > That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes most
> > applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also states:
> >
> > Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to implement
> > your most challenging business needs.
> >
> >
> > Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
> > proposition is.
> >
> > Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
> > hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything
> coming
> > from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of a
> > framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
> >
> > But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> > potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
> > setup and I don't want any excess'.?
> >
> > And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
> > download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
> >
> > And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do project
> > mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
> >
> > That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get that +
> > accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
> > solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce (plus a
> > whole lot more)
> >
> > And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that
> potential
> > customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I don't
> > need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I
> leave
> > it in, who knows what it will do.
> >
> > Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
> > (framework components, some components in applications). The rest are
> just
> > layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz Value
> > Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
> >
> > I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> > what is it? What is yours?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> > Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> > Based Manufacturing, Professional
> > Services and Retail & Trade
> > http://www.orrtiz.com
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> > jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> > >
> > >> Hi Pierre
> > >>
> > >> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa
> > application.
> > >>
> > >>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
> > >> hypothetical scenario:
> > >>
> > >> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
> > >> - 3rd Party HR;
> > >> - 3rd Party SFA;
> > >> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
> > >> - 3rd Party CMS;
> > >> - etc
> > >>
> > >> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are core
> > >> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Good point Gavin :D
> > >
> > > Jacques
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: OFBiz Value Proposition! What is it? And to you? (was Re:
Passport Component for OAuth2)
Posted by Gavin Mabie <kw...@gmail.com>.
Hi Pierre
I'm not sure where we're going with this discussion. My original input was
to suggest that OAuth2 might not fit into the "special purpose" category
and that it should rather be considered a tool/utility. As it transpires,
there seems to be divergent opinions (at least between you and me) as to
what "special purpose" in fact is. Frankly, this is a moot point with its
relevance perhaps limited to how the project (Ofbiz) presents the system.
The system is flexible enough for developers to place application
components into folders as they wish. A developer might well decide to
place manufacturing in the "special purpose" folder. Nothing wrong with
that.
However ,the theme that emerges from this and other discussions on the
topic is that the "special purpose" folder is at times viewed as a folder
for miscellaneous. Miscellaneous in this instance includes components that
are (a) not well supported in terms of committer contributions and (b)
where there is a perceived better alternative in the open source market.
My initial point was simply that we, from a project point of view, should
have some clarity as to how we categorise components.There are references
on the Ofbiz wiki to "special purpose" components as "process-or
role-oriented
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Announcement+for+new+release+Apache+OFBiz+09.04.01>".
There is also reference to the requirement that "special purpose"
components should not be interdependent
<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies>.
I agree with both points, but I must add that to use it for "all-else"
would not be well-founded/well thought-through.
More directly to some of your specific questions:
> But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
> setup and I don't want any excess'.?
1. Firstly,I would be elated that the customer "wants" Ofbiz in the first
place.
2. Secondly, I would inquire as to why the customer only wants Ofbiz's
manufacturing functionality?
Responses to this question will undoubtedly be interesting - but its
certainly an opportunity for up-selling the system as a whole.
I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> what is it? What is yours?
Shortly, OOTB Ofbiz's biggest value is that, as a business process
management system, it provides an organisation with the software to manage
business functions through an integrated set of applications built on
robust open source technologies. Just my opinion.
Hope I wasn't too long-winded.
Gavin
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 8:49 AM, Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi All, Gavin,
>
> Starting a new thread. For the build up, see
>
> http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/pf7lnzjwow4g4igj?q=passport+oauth2+order:date-forward
>
> Our current homepage states as the value proposition the following:
>
> Apache OFBiz™ is an open source product for the automation of enterprise
> processes that includes framework components and business applications for
> ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), CRM (Customer Relationship Management),
> E-Business / E-Commerce, SCM (Supply Chain Management), MRP (Manufacturing
> Resource Planning), MMS/EAM (Maintenance Management System/Enterprise Asset
> Management), POS (Point Of Sale).
>
>
> That is the starting point of the value proposition, and it includes most
> applications (but not all in special purpose). The webpage also states:
>
> Use it out-of-the-box, customize it or use it as a framework to implement
> your most challenging business needs.
>
>
> Meaning that it can be adjusted to be part of whatever your value
> proposition is.
>
> Gavin, you asked what it would that value proposition is in the
> hypothetical scenario of it being used in combination of everything coming
> from third parties (see below). You should ask that the proponents of a
> framework only solution. They are better at it, I surmise.
>
> But what is your answer ( your value proposition of OFBiz), when a
> potential user comes to you and says: 'I want OFBiz for my manufacturing
> setup and I don't want any excess'.?
>
> And I would suspect it to be: great, that is feasible, but when you
> download it, you get, +humanres + ecommerce (and more)
>
> And what is when someone comes to you and told you: 'I want to do project
> mgt, and I want it integrated with my fico and hr solutions.
>
> That answer would be: Excellent, but when you download it, you get that +
> accounting + humanres + manufacturing + 3rd party payment integration
> solutions + 3rd party shipment integration solutions + ecommerce (plus a
> whole lot more)
>
> And then you'll probably say: but it can all be removed. So that potential
> customer might, and probably will think: so if I don't want parts I don't
> need, I am going to pay through the nose to get it removed. And if I leave
> it in, who knows what it will do.
>
> Yes there are parts that a good value proposition can't do without
> (framework components, some components in applications). The rest are just
> layer on top of the base of the cake. Options that makes the OFBiz Value
> Proposition the right one for any specific potential adopter.
>
> I don't define what the 'OFBiz Value Proposition' is. We all do that. And
> what is it? What is yours?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com
>
> On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com> wrote:
>
> > Le 22/03/2015 08:46, Gavin Mabie a écrit :
> >
> >> Hi Pierre
> >>
> >> If you use a 3rd party crm solution you wouldn't use the sfa
> application.
> >>
> >>> If you use a 3rd party HRM solution, you wouldn't use humanres.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Following this line of thinking, let's consider this ridiculous
> >> hypothetical scenario:
> >>
> >> - 3rd Party Accounting App;
> >> - 3rd Party HR;
> >> - 3rd Party SFA;
> >> - 3rd Party Catalog Management;
> >> - 3rd Party CMS;
> >> - etc
> >>
> >> What would be Ofbiz's Value Proposition in this case? There are core
> >> applications that users expect to find in an ERP OOTB.
> >>
> >
> > Good point Gavin :D
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> >
>