I don't agree that a separate project is necessary to get a well defined
application framework in OFBiz. We could achieve that in OFBiz if we
could get everyone to agree on what an "application framework" is. Once
that is defined, then it can be enforced - the same as it is with Moqui.
-Adrian
On 4/2/2011 12:53 PM, David E Jones wrote:
On Apr 2, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
I agree 100% with the end result - OFBiz running on a separate application
framework. The question is: How do we get from here to there? That is what my
original reply was trying to address.
That is the real trick isn't it... The idea of creating release branch and then
working in the trunk to start migrating to Moqui is an interesting one. The
fastest route to the migration would involve basically allowing much of it to
be broken rather than trying to juggle both frameworks as application artifacts
are migrated from one to the other. However, if we do that then the trunk
wouldn't be reliable at all and groups with more immediate needs would simply
not be able to use it.
Maybe the project is mature enough now that a stable release branch would be
adequate for many users and the community behind the framework migration could
work independently of that.
Another option would be to create a "fork". That would allow the current OFBiz
on the current OFBiz Framework to continue under development by those interested, and for
those interested in a migrating to the Moqui Framework they could do it as a separate
project without worrying about the legacy and backward compatibility issues, and ensuring
proper functioning (which would allow for a more traditional develop and release model
too, so it could go through normal alpha/beta/RC/etc cycles).
The better way, I don't know... I guess it depends on how many in the community
fall into each camp (needing something continuable workable to base their
efforts on, versus being able to work on something that won't be ready for at
least a number of months).
One other thing to keep in mind during this discussion: The Moqui framework is
under the control of a single person, and possibly in the future, a small group
of committers. Will the Moqui community have the necessary resources to support
OFBiz once a commitment is made to use it instead of our own framework?
That is correct, it is a separate project with a different management and
resource model. There are currently around 100 such libraries in OFBiz, and by
size Moqui Framework wouldn't be the biggest. There would be dramatic
dependencies on it of course, and I guess that's where your concern is based.
As fas as support goes, those involved with Moqui don't need to support OFBiz
or the OFBiz community, they just need to support the Moqui Framework. It's
functionality that needs to be supported in this case, not people. Because of
the more traditional release cycle of Moqui Framework, and because it has a
well-defined scope, it should be used as-is and upgraded periodically just like
any other library.
Chances are OFBiz would benefit from a different build and deploy model than
the default Moqui one, and probably different screen/form output templates
(perhaps even a different XML Actions output template), and possibly even
additional resource referencers, template renderers, script runners, etc. But,
that is all external to the Moqui Framework.
Anyway, the point is that bug-fixing will be the primary need for the OFBiz
Community, and that is the need for all other Moqui Framework users as well.
On a side note, there is a great benefit to OFBiz in using an external
framework in that the development model changes from all sorts of random
changes going into the framework as needed to a more defined and thought out
change process to preserve a more generic and flexible set of tools. I don't
think there is any way you can get that benefit without the clear segregation
between both the projects and the communities behind them.
-David
-Adrian
On 4/2/2011 11:28 AM, David E Jones wrote:
What I mean is throw out the OFBiz Framework and migrate the applications and
specialpurpose components to run on Moqui Framework, and perhaps even
incorporate the Mantle stuff too (mostly UDM, USL).
After that OFBiz would be the applications project it was meant to be
originally, as opposed to the framework + applications that is became out of
necessity.
-David
On Apr 2, 2011, at 12:21 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
What does "migrate to use Moqui Framework" mean? Maybe I'm not understanding
what you're proposing.
-Adrian
On 4/2/2011 11:18 AM, David E Jones wrote:
Adrian,
Just to see if I understand correctly what you wrote: are you proposing to make
changes to the OFBiz Framework using code and ideas from the Moqui Framework?
If so, why not just migrate to use Moqui Framework?
-David
On Apr 2, 2011, at 10:15 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Based on the previous discussion we had on this subject, I would suggest we
create an 11.x branch, and then start discussing a road map for porting the
changes from Moqui to OFBiz. I hope to be available to help in November.
-Adrian
On 4/1/2011 11:09 PM, David E Jones wrote:
I still don't know if or how all of this will turn out, but here is the latest
on the changes I've been wanting to make in the OFBiz Framework, but gave up on
doing directly in OFBiz about a year and a half ago. The redesigned framework
is a separate project that is now in beta (I just did the release today):
http://www.moqui.org/
The Moqui Framework is now feature-complete for the planned feature set of the
1.0 version. There are details about this in the release notes, including
everything in this release and the previous 3 releases, plus a list of features
not to be included in 1.0.
At this point the framework is far enough along that it is a clear demonstration of the
changes that I would like to see in OFBiz, but that are difficult to do in a project with
such a mature community and a large set of software that depends on it. Some of the main
things are how the security and authorization are done, how the API is organized, the
separation between framework and non-framework runtime artifacts, the deployment model
(described in detail in the RunDeploy.txt file in the project), the way templates are
used for simple-methods (XML Actions in Moqui) and the form/screen/etc widgets (XML
Screens, Forms in Moqui), and how the web "controller" in OFBiz could be
combined with screens and made hierarchical to introduce a lot of flexibility and far
better organization of applications (less files open, easier to find things, automatic
menu creation, per-used menu items/subscreens, and much more).
Now that the beta is out the next step is to start building more real-world
applications with it (so far the framework just has an example app and some
basic tools built on it), and those will act as test cases as well. I don't
have any intention to create another project like OFBiz that is a comprehensive
ERP/CRM/etc/etc/etc system, and instead I'm hoping those will be separate
project.
However, I am working on a project to act as a basis for various applications that will
share the same data model, common services, and derive from a common set of stories too.
This project is called "Mantle". To see how this all fits together, check out
the home page on the moqui.org site which has a diagram that includes these things. There
is also a link to the github repository that has the Mantle UDM (Universal Data Model)
progress so far.
Back to the first comment: I don't know all of this will turn out. In a way it
would be interesting to have OFBiz migrate to use these things, but that may
not be of interest to very many in the community, so I won't be too surprised
if that never happens. I've already heard from a couple of people who have
proposed this idea, and I know some others would probably be very against it.
On the other hand, if anyone is curious about such a thing, now it's possible
to get an idea of what it might look like by look at the Moqui Framework and
the example application and such.
-David
