Thank Scott… my thoughts are largely along these lines and have been for some time: why migrate OFBiz data model, service, and applications to Moqui Framework when there is also an opportunity to clean up the data model, services, and make the applications more usable OOTB and more targeted to specific sorts of organizations?
My main reason for supporting an OFBiz migration toward Moqui Framework (and not including Mantle, etc) would be based on interest within the OFBiz community. There is some justification for sticking with the same data model, etc even with a different underlying framework so that the upgrade path for current OFBiz users is easier. However, I think the number of people interested in or needing such a thing is pretty limited, not likely to result in a collaborative open source effort of a sufficient scale. -David > On 21 May 2015, at 01:49, Scott Gray <scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: > > Advance cast of -1 in case I miss the vote if it ever comes. > > Moqui is it's own eco-system. The only way to "replace the framework with > Moqui" is to rewrite the apps to be moqui apps. If that was done, what > does it have to do with OFBiz@Apache? We could rename the project to Apps > for Moqui and become application curators and essentially be a different > project. But what's the point of doing that here rather than over at > moqui? (wherever "at moqui" is) > > The work I think Adrian is suggesting is introducing Moqui as some sort of > hybrid into OFBiz until we can phase out the OFBiz framework completely. > To me that seems like a convoluted way to go instead of just rewriting the > apps. > > Regards > Scott > > On 27 April 2015 at 02:11, Jacopo Cappellato < > jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxsystems.com> wrote: > >> On Apr 26, 2015, at 3:09 PM, Adrian Crum < >> adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> wrote: >> >>> How about "Replace framework core functionality - like entity engine, >> service engine, and security with Moqui." >>> >>> Is that specific enough? >>> >> >> Not really: we have talked about bringing the whole Moqui codebase into >> the OFBiz trunk (bad idea in my opinion), or migrating the applications to >> Moqui, or reimplementing them and the sentence above doesn't specify a >> direction. >> And why entity engine, service and security and not for example >> transaction management, connection pooling, ui technology, logging etc...? >> >> Jacopo >> >>> Adrian Crum >>> Sandglass Software >>> www.sandglass-software.com >>> >>> On 4/26/2015 1:47 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >>>> The discussion is interesting and fascinating but in this thread >> completely different ideas have been expressed: from forking Moqui into >> OFBiz to rewriting OFBiz applications from scratch on top of Moqui etc... >>>> >>>> My vote will be negative if the vote will be as generic as "replace >> OFBiz framework with Moqui" is because it would not be an actionable item >> and there could be 1000 totally different ways to implement it. >>>> >>>> Jacopo >>>> >>>> >>>> On Apr 26, 2015, at 1:58 PM, Adrian Crum < >> adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This has been discussed for nearly a week now. Shall we start a vote? >>>>> >>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>> >>>>> On 4/20/2015 6:31 AM, Hans Bakker wrote: >>>>>> Again, as discussed at the ApacheCon in Austin we should start setting >>>>>> up a plan how to best move the ERP application to the Moqui framework. >>>>>> Moqui should not be part of the Apache foundation however the ERP >>>>>> application should remain there. >>>>>> >>>>>> Not only will it improve development of the ERP system but also will >>>>>> establish a clean separation between application and frameworks and >>>>>> hopefully getting David Jones back into the project. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, I realize i open the pandora box :-) but we need to make some >> major >>>>>> decisions.... >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Hans Bakker >>>>>> antwebsystems.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >> >>
