https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBENDUSER/High+Level+End-to-End+Processes
shows 1 Use Case as being documented
http://www.higherpass.com/apache/Tutorials/Configuring-Ofbiz-To-Use-A-Mysql-Database/
is a nice description of using MySQL that could be incorporated into the
docs as an example of the process described in the text.
It shows the actual XML which is reassuring.
<quote>
- What pieces of the on-line documentation are the responsibility of
Apache? Core accounting - A/P, A/R, G/L? Other common functions?
Seems that you are focused on accounting ;)
</quote>
These are areas where one would not expect a lot of customization since
the processes are standard for most of the world.
There may be other areas where many people use OOB code and screens.
I was only suggesting a starting point, not a scope.
<quote>
- What is the impact of a release that changes a use case?
Very ambitious...
</quote>
I disagree.
The person proposing to change the use case has to describe the change
when submitting the patch/enhancement to the review process.
This could replace some of the verbage and screenshots that should be
part of the review.
"Currently the system does X,Y and Z to process transaction type A. In
step Y there is a problem with M. My enhancement modify the process so
that the system does X, Y, and Y1 if this condition is met before moving
to Z." The new process can become the brief use case for Transaction
Type A with a little additional introductory text.
It also could be incorporated into a patch to the user manual without a
huge effort.
Since there is currently only 1 use case for the whole system, it might
encourage additional use cases to be developed even if they are not as
extensive as the existing one.
I worry that the existing use case is perhaps too detailed to act as a
model.
I do understand that there has to be a balance between value and TCO.
Ron
On 20/06/2014 5:48 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Le 17/06/2014 14:24, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
My 2 cents.
At least a policy and roadmap about how the OfBiz project will go
from where it is now to where the PMC thinks that it should be.
- What is the overall strategy for documentation - intended wiki
scope, on-line help, framework docs, end-user docs, use cases
The "problem" (and also the reason OFBiz exists) is we are a free
community, so with sparse human resources .
So each time we try to plan something we don't enough interest or
human resources to achieve it and then it's obsolete
Also I must say devs prefer to develops than documenting... since it's
on their free time... I guess you get it...
When we get enough time we do some efforts and there are some good
examples around
- What parts of the wiki are known to be wrong? List of known defects
should be added to the JIRA.
This is where things get tricky, reorganising the open wiki take time
and long enough to embrace all the documentation.
We rarely have this luxury :/
- What is the policy and priority for documenting use cases? Only 1
documented at the moment.
Which one? :D
What is the impact of a release that changes a use case?
Very ambitious...
Can software be released if the use case documentation is made
incorrect by the change?
I think Jacopo already replied
- What parallel documentation is available that could be used with
the authors' permissions to fill in gaps?
This another part where we would need help, but as soon as people are
able to manage by themselves, they forget it, will you do the same?
The MySQL configuration article that I found would be a great
addition to the installation docs.
Ref please?
- What pieces of the on-line documentation are the responsibility of
Apache? Core accounting - A/P, A/R, G/L? Other common functions?
Seems that you are focused on accounting ;)
What parts are deemed to be so implementation specific that they
must be provided by the person implementing the system for a client?
Even in this case we can refer to them if they are of good quality.
This is for instance what I did for the subscriptions and a good
article from Sumit Porwal at Amicontech
What scaffolding should be provided to simplify the implementation
where the on-line docs are installation specific.
It would be interesting to see what the OFBiz addons manager do
A public statement by the PMC pf its documentation policy would help
new adopters to understand the situation.
This could be discussed here indeed
It would also provide a focus for people who can help with docs or
provide chunks of documentation that they have in other places
(books, customer installations, internal corporate docs).
It may be that some of the main players are making revenue from
providing documentation and training that is predicated on the poor
state of the current documentation and this may have to be a factor
in the discussion.
Can ways be found to reward contributors who are adding their IP to
the pool?
I don't think so. I long ago propose the reverse bounty idea, it did
not happen http://markmail.org/message/meyd2cccngk4yqxm Maybe I did
not push enough see http://markmail.org/message/hiwkf6gxocydfrqg
Jacques
Extracts from books link to the books? Links to companies that
provide customization of on-line docs in return for scaffolding?
There may be more things that the PMC discovers once it decides to
take some action on documentation but I think that these would be
good starting points for the discussion.
Ron
On 17/06/2014 5:41 AM, Anil Patel wrote:
Pierre,
Please elaborate, may be I can help.
Are you saying PMC should set guidelines for documentation that
should be delivered with each new feature or bug fix?
Thanks and Regards
Anil Patel
COO
Hotwax Media Inc
http://www.hotwaxmedia.com/
ApacheCon US 2014 Silver Sponsor
http://na.apachecon.com/sponsor/our-sponsors
On Jun 16, 2014, at 6:17 PM, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Adrian,
My apologies, but I must have missed your answer to the question
stated below.
Is it possible for the PMC to set some targets for a target level
of documentation so that there is a baseline set of JIRA issues on
which the PMC agrees?
Regard,
Pierre
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
Op 16 jun. 2014 om 23:11 heeft Adrian Crum
<adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> het volgende geschreven:
I answered the questions. Why don't you take some time and
actually read my replies?
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 6/16/2014 1:20 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
Adrian,
Why don't you, as a representative of the PMC, start with trying
to answer
the questions one by one? So that Ron and other community members
can
indeed improve documentation regarding the various aspects of the
product....
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 Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Adrian Crum <
adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> wrote:
I'm confused. Are you asking for guidance to improve the
project, or are
you simply ranting because the project doesn't measure up to
your standards?
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 6/16/2014 11:13 AM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
On 16/06/2014 1:46 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Keep in mind that this is an all volunteer, open source project.
Therefore, there is no "industry standard."
Does the same assumption apply that volunteers can not write
code that
meets industry standards for quality or functionality just
because they
are not paid?
There are a number of Apache projects that have very good
documentation.
Those who have contributed documentation in the past learned
by using
the software and asking questions on the user mailing list.
No wonder the docs are in such poor shape.
It is hard enough to write docs but to expect that users are
going to
reverse-engineer use cases and UI functionality from code and
config
files or playing with screens to write docs for code that
someone else
writes is way too much to expect from a volunteer.
Ron
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 6/16/2014 10:26 AM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
And where would I get the facts to include in the documentation?
Is there a secret place where the people writing code write
down what
the user is supposed to do with the code (use cases)?
The copy of the distribution that I downloaded did not even
include a
draft Release Note.
Does the PMC consider that the documentation currently
existing to be
correct, complete and in line with what is industry standard
for a
version 12.x.x release?
Ron
On 16/06/2014 11:33 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
This is a maintenance release, so it includes any
documentation that
existed when the release branch was created.
If you would like to see more documentation included in the
trunk,
then feel free to submit patches to Jira.
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 6/16/2014 8:15 AM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
-1
Given the errors in the wiki documentation and the lack of
on-line
help, it is hard to see how this could be considered
"tested" (try to
install it using the docs for a "recommended" production
database and
you can see it is not possible that it passed "manual
tests" unless
the
test suite is too trivial to be taken seriously) or "complete"
(on-line
help just opens a page of sections headings that does not
do anything
when you click on it).
I don't see any Release notes in the distribution.
Are the new features at least documented?
Did the use cases for the new features and bug fixes get
into the
documentation?
If the PMC group continues to allow new releases to be made
without
any
attention to documentation, OfBiz will never get the
documentation
that
it needs. At least make documentation of items that are
worked on in a
release, mandatory.
Is it possible for the PMC to set some targets for a target
level of
documentation so that there is a baseline set of JIRA
issues on which
the PMC agrees?
Ron
On 16/06/2014 9:25 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
+1
Jacopo
On Jun 9, 2014, at 4:09 PM, Jacopo Cappellato
<jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> wrote:
This is the vote thread to release a new (bug fix) release
for the
12.04 branch. This new release, "Apache OFBiz 12.04.03"
(major
release number: "12.04"; minor release number: "03"),
will supersede
the release "Apache OFBiz 12.04.02".
The release files can be downloaded from here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ofbiz/
(committers only) or from here:
http://people.apache.org/~jacopoc/dist/
(everyone else)
and are:
* apache-ofbiz-12.04.03.zip: the release package, based
on the 12.04
branch at revision 1601320 (latest as of now)
* KEYS: text file with keys
* apache-ofbiz-12.04.03.zip.asc: the detached signature file
* apache-ofbiz-12.04.03.zip.md5,
apache-ofbiz-12.04.03.zip.sha:
hashes
Please download and test the zip file and its signatures
(for
instructions on testing the signatures see
http://www.apache.org/info/verification.html).
Vote:
[ +1] release as Apache OFBiz 12.04.03
[ -1] do not release
This vote will be closed in 5 days.
For more details about this process please read
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
The following text is quoted from the above url:
"Votes on whether a package is ready to be released use
majority
approval -- i.e. at least three PMC members must vote
affirmatively
for release, and there must be more positive than
negative votes.
Releases may not be vetoed. Generally the community will
cancel the
release vote if anyone identifies serious problems, but
in most
cases
the ultimate decision, lies with the individual serving
as release
manager."
Kind Regards,
Jacopo
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
