Vasanth Kamatgi wrote: > But, the downside of this approach is - I would be losing the ofbiz community > improvements in the ecommerce front end. for any change / bugfix / > enhancement in the ecommerce module, I need to explicitly port it again in > my own implementation, which is kind of contradictory to the reason why I > had wanted to use an open source application with activity community in the > first place. In fact, we had evaluated this option as well but discarded it > for the reason mentioned above. > There is a risk but that risk is smaller than the community moving arbitrarily to Wicket. If you feel that a Wicket solution would be so strong that it would sway the opinion of the whole community then it is your responsibility to undertake that risk. The community is very unlikely to undertake such a risk based on someone saying "hey, I think this is a great idea". We have undertaken a similar risk with our own internal build-outs (worse, actually, since we built a new templating framework instead of using an existing one).
Really, conducted properly, the risk you outline is not so high. In theory, your Wicket solution will be a thin binding layer between the core OFBiz logic (which won't need to change) and your customer's HTML (which must be custom). -- Ean Schuessler, CTO [email protected] 214-720-0700 x 315 Brainfood, Inc. http://www.brainfood.com
