I will be working on that today. -Adrian
--- On Sat, 12/18/10, Jacopo Cappellato <jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote: > IMO the best way to go at this point > is to move the ui for the administration of user logins and > permissions from the party to the webtools web application. > In this way, in a framework only setup, we will have some > screens to create new user accounts and administer them. I > don't think that we have to provide screens addressed to > users (not administrators) to manage their user preferences: > the nature of this ui would be too much dependent on the > nature of the custom applications that will be used with the > framework. > > Kind regards, > > Jacopo > > On Dec 18, 2010, at 3:23 PM, Bruno Busco wrote: > > > By clicking on the party's name in the header the user > is directed to this > > screen: > > https://demo-trunk.ofbiz.apache.org/partymgr/control/viewprofile?partyId=admin > > > > Here there are lots of links and information related > to all kind of things: > > orders, invoices, visits etc. > > In a framework-only installation this screen should > only allow the user to > > access to its personal information, password, > preferences etc. > > How could we get this? > > Could we replace this screen with a (non > user-editable) PortalPage where > > every installed application could add their > screenlets? > > > > Thank you, > > Bruno > > > > 2010/12/16 David E Jones <d...@me.com> > > > >> > >> Not really BJ, there is a consensus on making the > framework more (or > >> totally) independent from the applications and > specialpurpose components. > >> The only question is the best way to do that, and > it looks like as far as a > >> general approach goes (moving minimal needed parts > from application > >> components to framework components) a fair > consensus is being reached > >> quickly. > >> > >> Of course, this is helped by lots of previous > discussion on this topic. > >> > >> -David > >> > >> > >> On Dec 15, 2010, at 10:47 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > >> > >>> I don't think you will find a consensus so > just need to branch your own > >> frame work as I did. > >>> > >>> > >>> ========================= > >>> BJ Freeman > >>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier > Automation < > >> http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52> > >>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/> > >>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist > >>> > >>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man > >>> > >>> > >>> Adrian Crum sent the following on 12/15/2010 > 10:40 AM: > >>>> To clarify, I'm trying to get the > components in the framework folder to > >>>> run by themselves - without the components > found in the applications > >>>> folder. Some of the framework components > have UIs. > >>>> > >>>> I understand everyone has a different > opinion on what constitutes a > >>>> framework, so I don't want to rehash that > discussion. I just want to > >>>> disable the components in the applications > folder and still have OFBiz > >> run. > >>>> > >>>> -Adrian > >>>> > >>>> On 12/15/2010 10:13 AM, BJ Freeman wrote: > >>>>> first question is should there be any > UI activity at the framework > >> level. > >>>>> Should not it just be the support to > allow a UI system to put > >> installed. > >>>>> when I mean UI I am talking about any > interaction to the user. > >>>>> > >>>>> ========================= > >>>>> BJ Freeman > >>>>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier > Automation > >>>>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52> > >>>>> Specialtymarket.com <http://www.specialtymarket.com/> > >>>>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist > >>>>> > >>>>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Adrian Crum sent the following on > 12/15/2010 9:52 AM: > >>>>>> I'm working on a project that > requires only the OFBiz framework. I'm > >>>>>> trying to get a framework-only > installation to run. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> There are a lot of dependencies on > the party and content components. > >>>>>> Removing dependencies on the party > component should be fairly easy. > >> The > >>>>>> online help system uses the > content component, so that is an issue. > >>>>>> Should we move the content > component to the framework? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -Adrian > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >
