Hi Pierre, I would call the BI component more of a skeleton than a solution. In fact many things (entities, services, etc ...) in it can be used in BIRT. But you do not have charting, drill-down, styling, event model and many other things that a full blown BI engine can provide (like BIRT, jasper or pentaho).
Taher Alkhateeb On Feb 27, 2015 11:22 AM, "Pierre Smits" <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> wrote: > We have OLAP capabilities in OFBiz: for each tenant a olap repository is > created via the entity-engine. We have cube definitions: dimensions, facts > and star schemas are defined in the bi component. > > I see interest. > > Best 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 Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Ron Wheeler < > rwhee...@artifact-software.com > > wrote: > > > It seems that BIRT is really something like the Framework. > > - It has some assets and code > > - These assets and code are used throught the Base Applications and > > SpecialPurpose components whenever you need to display a graphic or > > dashboard, provide an interactive drilldown or want to produce a nice > > report for display or PDF output. > > > > It is not really a separate component. > > > > Guess what! It sounds like a sub-project is the right way to handle this > > so people with the right skillsets can drive the process. > > > > In the meantime, the list of tasks identified by Taher is a very good > > starting point. > > Any idea of the number of manhours required to produce an initial toolkit > > that the application developers could use to integrate Analytics into > each > > component that requires it? How much of this stuff exists buried in > > applications or in customized OFBIz implementation that could be > > contributed. > > > > Does anybody see why this is essential to the competitive position of > > OFBiz or is it just a "nice to have"? > > This goes back to my earlier commens and "marketing" research when > someone > > was looking to get Gartner to look at OFBiz. > > The lack of integrated Analytics would be a big negative in comparison > > with other ERPs. > > > > For building eCommerce websites reporting is not a big deal but if you > are > > going to provide an ERP, the CFO is going to want dashboards, the > > production manager will vote for the system that gives him strong tools > to > > see comparisons and trends in order backlog, production, quality, > manpower > > utilisation, costs, etc. > > The VP HR is going to want graphs on departmental manpower costs, > > overtime, expenses etc. that can be shown to the CFO and CEO at a moments > > notice. > > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > On 26/02/2015 10:21 AM, Taher Alkhateeb wrote: > > > >> Hi Ron and everyone, > >> > >> BIRT is very powerful but by no means easy! I was working for a while on > >> developing an infrastructure for OFBIZ to make it a bit more streamlined > >> across the pages but stopped after a while for two reasons: 1) it was > >> bigger work than I expected and 2) the community seemed uninterested in > the > >> component as you can observe in our discussion in this JIRA for example: > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5070 > >> > >> To make it reach its potential, there are multiple things to do of which > >> I did some partially: > >> > >> - Create a BIRT library (filename.rptlibrary) which hold references to > >> javascript source files, CSS files, etc .. and it contains all the > assets > >> (logo, fonts, colors, you name it) so that you have a unified look and > feel > >> and unified data preparation scripts for all reports > >> - Create CSS files unifying the look and feel of all reports > >> - Create javascript files that contain scripts for repeating tasks > >> (library imports, UI label preparation, report layout, parameter import > and > >> validation, exception handling etc ...) > >> - Create sub-libraries that handle business intelligence requirements. > >> For example, you can prepare common cubes on the main entities of the > >> system (Party, Product, OrderHeader, Accounting Transaction, etc ...) > >> - Finally, once the above is in place, then you can design a whole heap > >> of reports, OLAP cupes, Charts, you name it! > >> > >> The question remains, is the community interested in adopting BIRT as > its > >> reporting tool? If not, then renaming it would not make much sense given > >> the effort put into fixing all the links to the component and anything > else > >> that might break from the rename. > >> > >> My 2 cents! > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Taher Alkhateeb > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> > >> From: "Ron Wheeler" <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> > >> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org > >> Sent: Thursday, 26 February, 2015 6:01:09 PM > >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Change name of birt component > >> > >> You think that it might be more aspirational than real? > >> > >> http://bod-wiki.birtondemand.com/wiki/index.php?title=App_Mashboard is > >> the kind of thing that I expect OFBiz to support one day. > >> > >> Perhaps a more ambitious name might encourage someone to take an > >> interest in enhancing the capabilities. > >> > >> "BIRT" is just the name of a tool and gives no idea about what > >> functionality is possible. > >> > >> "Reports" seems to understate what BIRT can do. > >> I am not sure of the work required to enhance the existing interface to > >> produce more of what BIRT can do OOTB but it seems to be something > >> pretty easy > >> http://www.theserverside.com/news/1364376/Using-Eclipse- > >> BIRT-Report-Libraries-and-Templates > >> > >> > >> Ron > >> > >> On 26/02/2015 9:19 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: > >> > >>> My main concern is that assigning a generic name (such as "reports" or > >>> "analytics") to a component that is just one very specific way (and in > some > >>> ways limited/questionable for the way the Birt has been integrated) to > >>> implement an integration with a reporting tool may be misleading. > >>> > >>> Jacopo > >>> > >>> On Feb 26, 2015, at 12:46 AM, Pierre Smits <pierre.sm...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>>> > >>>> Currently, all component names describe - in one word - what the > >>>> components > >>>> are about and what kind of functionality the user - from a business > >>>> point > >>>> of view - can expect. As examples: accounting is related to the > various > >>>> accounting (financial, gl, invoicing, payment, , etc) functions and > >>>> services, and projectmgr is related to program and project management, > >>>> project task assignment and time registration. > >>>> > >>>> The birt component is a bit the odd one out. The name doesn't say in > >>>> that > >>>> one word what it delivers. In stead it is an acronym for a specific > >>>> third > >>>> party integration solution and another open source project with the > same > >>>> name (birt, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BIRT_Project ). One > could > >>>> even say it is the name of a tool, not the name of a business > >>>> functionality. > >>>> > >>>> In order to be able to increase awareness of the multitude of business > >>>> functionalities (as could be done by using the name of the components) > >>>> and > >>>> improve adoption, I suggest to change the name (and the references to > >>>> it in > >>>> the component and others) to something that is more to the point > >>>> business > >>>> wise. > >>>> > >>>> I propose we rename it to 'reports'. > >>>> > >>>> What do you think? > >>>> > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Pierre Smits > >>>> > >>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* > >>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- > >>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional > >>>> Services and Retail & Trade > >>>> http://www.orrtiz.com > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > -- > > Ron Wheeler > > President > > Artifact Software Inc > > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > > skype: ronaldmwheeler > > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > > > > >
