That approach sounds very monolithic, and I tend to avoid monoliths.

I gave this subject a lot of thought about a year ago when I was working on a vision for a new framework (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBADMIN/Another+Framework+Vision). In particular, I was trying to devise a way for us to build a new architecture for OFBiz out of well-defined and self-contained parts - with the ultimate goal of using OSGI to connect them all together.

That goal led to only one pattern that seemed to work: Hub-and-spoke. Hubs can be suspended, replaced, and restarted without too much disruption because they affect only the spokes connected to them.

It sounds like what you're proposing is a layered pattern - like a wall built up of many bricks, but with an all-covering capstone on top.

I don't have a strong opinion on which approach is best, but I tend to favor modularity.

The discussion is worthwhile, and I appreciate you starting it.

-Adrian

On 3/14/2012 2:37 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
In the eraly days of the project, the OFBiz applications have been designed as 
independent components to make them more reusable and because they were 
designed to be a set of reusable and generic artifacts, each of them based on a 
specific domain of the data model (order, party, product etc...).
They were not intended to be ready to be used out of the box; they were not 
intended to implement complete ERP workflows (mostly all complete real World 
workflows encompass several domains) but rather to provide some common 
artifacts (screens, forms, basic business rules) to facilitate the 
implementation of custom applications.
However over the years, they have been implemented to be used as being part of 
the same big suite of ERP applications: i.e. the building blocks of a specific 
instance of an ERP system.
Some (parts) of them have become "ready to be used" out of the box (for certain 
specific business models) by implementing more specific workflows (based on some real 
World requirements coming from companies): because of the fact that there was not a 
central design and coordination (which industry/business to implement etc...) and because 
for the same task (shipping, receiving etc...) there are thousands of different valid 
worflows we have now several workflows in OFBiz that implement similar features but in 
different alternative ways.
It is off topic here to say if this is good (the company user can choose 
between a series of choices based on the nature of its business and then 
customize/clean/complete them) or bad (a lot of duplicated code, the 
applications seem to deal with everything but they are not really really good 
for anything): however it is a reality that the applications are now more a 
suite of ERP application (one application) rather than reusable generic 
artifacts that can be plugged together.
In fact the OFBiz Applications are now a set of OFBiz components that are 
strictly interdependent at several layers (data model, service, ui).

In their current status I believe that it would be better to merge them into one big 
component, the "Apache OFBiz ERP" (or a better name).
The component will contain:
* the complete data model for the OFBiz application
* all the services (Java, Minilang)
* all data
* one web application (merged from the existing ones); even if initially we 
could do this in steps and keep them separated as they are now but under the 
same component
* one aggregated and consolidated set of ui labels

Even in one component we will have several mechanisms to categorize our 
artifacts (file names, folders) even if I would suggest to rethink them based 
on new rules (and only if we need the categorization).
We could merge a lot of files (data preparation scripts, screen definitions, 
service definitions etc...) to make them more consistent. We would also resolve 
some of the issues with inter-application links and navigation.
I am pretty sure that we could end up with less code and easier to organize and 
maintain.

It will also be more practical to reuse this component and extend it from an 
external hot deploy component: you will have to extend one webapp and then 
reuse from the official component what you like.

This is just the rough ideas and there could be some variants to it: we could 
isolate all the data model and services into one component and all the 
applications (ui, screens, controllers, data prep scripts and templates) into 
another one. etc. etc. etc...

It is a lot of work but we are a big community and we like to keep us busy.

What do you think?

Jacopo

Reply via email to