comment in-line Le 28/11/2016 à 22:43, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : > Hi Sharan, > > Thank you for starting this important topic. OFBiz definitely needs > strategic objectives and a sense of direction. To try to formulate a > strategy, I would suggest perhaps we highlight where I think OFBiz delivers > value and where it does not, and based on that provide a few suggestions on > moving forward. > > OFBiz main value proposition > ------------------------------------------- > - A very robust domain model based on the data model resource book. > - A library of services to control and manipulate the data model. > - A DSL that hides and abstracts away the complexity of everything (services, > entities, widgets, routing, etc...) > and makes it easy for adopters to provide value quickly. - A plugin system AND a plugin strong organization > - A business automation suite. > > What OFBiz is not (yet?) > ------------------------------------ > Currently OFBiz may provide some of the below, but it is not the main value > proposition. > > - A web framework > - A general purpose programming environment I prefer : A general purpose programming and parametrized environment > - An ERP system ready for immediate use by business owners (not geared for > end-users) - A business functions library usable to build a Vertical Business ERP solution > > Where should we focus? > ----------------------------------- > If you agree with the above assessment on OFBiz's value proposition, then I > think we need to focus our limited resources and efforts and utilize the > help of the community where it provides the highest value for effort. To > start this discussion I suggest the list of below strategic objectives to > try and move forward over the next 1-2 years at which time we can review > and amend the strategy: > > - UI redesign: I think the user interface is one of the weakest points in > our project and is probably the most critical item for adoption because at > the end this is what people _see_. Having non-technical people download > OFBiz, fire it up and start using it immediately without the intervention > of a consultant or a developer is key to bigger adoption. Bigger adoption > in turn leads to a more thriving community and business built around OFBiz. > Hence we need a fully redesigned user interface that is not a reference for > developers but rather a usable interface immediately to someone who needs > an ERP platform for their business. I propose to change the last sentence by : ... developers but rather a usable interface immediately to demonstrate ofbiz usability and flexibility to someone who needs an ERP platform for their business.
Maybe the difference at which I want to point is only on the use case definition to implement on the OOTB kernel > > - Documentation: We have a lot of documentation resources, but they are > unorganized, scattered and outdated. Documentation is another key driver of > adoption and I think a significant amount of work needs to go into > organizing and cleaning up our documentation. We need a unified resource > for getting information. I really like for example the documentation of > Gradle found in docs.gradle.org which breaks things down beautifully into a > user guide, a DSL reference and JavaDocs with very good sub-categorization > and hyperlinks between everything. +10 for > Documentation is another key driver of > adoption and I think a significant amount of work needs to go into > organizing and cleaning up our documentation. But also at the technical architecture and tools available for the writers. Documentation (creating / modifying / reading / customizing / organizing) should be part of the " general purpose programming and parametrized environment" Documentation should be usable as help for key-users/consultant/technical, directly from "ofbiz applications". > - Branding: A new website, activities on social media, success stories > (updating), references, etc ... > > The reason I recommend the above strategic initiatives is that they are > relatively easy and most community members can contribute to which would > provide great value by leveraging the help of as many people as we can. > > Thoughts? > > Cheers, > > Taher Alkhateeb > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Sharan Foga <sha...@apache.org> wrote: > >> There was a bit that I missed - and this is a common thing that keeps >> coming back up when we get together and talk: >> >> OFBiz could deliver more than one product. We could have more than one >> product active at the same time e.g >> >> - Framework with applications >> - Advanced UI but without all features >> - Advanced features but with the poor UI >> >> This is also something that we could think about for the high level >> strategy. >> >> Thanks >> Sharan >> >> On 2016-11-28 11:08 (+0100), "Sharan Foga"<sha...@apache.org> wrote: >>> Hi Everyone >>> >>> One of the topics that came up during the brainstorming in Seville was >> that the project desperately needs a clear strategy and roadmap. >>> >>> Benefits: >>> - A strategy will provide a clear path for people to follow >>> - A strategy will allow us to set goals / milestones and metrics about >> progress >>> >>> In past maybe we have tried to do too much (tried to do it all at once - >> which is why we find it h ard to focus). >>> >>> - One suggestion was to set a maximum of 3 goals and then work only on >> these. To define these goals we need to look at what is the most important >> thing that we want to achieve - and base them on that. >>> - Another suggestion was that the most important thing for the project >> is driving adoption. If this is true then what are the key blockers that >> stop user adoption of OFBiz? (the UI!) >>> - Suggestion to organise / setup teams from the community that focus on >> specific areas (e.g. workgroups) - this could really help progress >>> >>> So to get the discussion started: >>> >>> 1. Do people agree that the project needs to focus on driving adoption? >>> 2. Do people think that the UI is one of the key things that stops this >> ? (If, not then please include what do you think is) >>> 3. What goals could we set? >>> 4. Are people interested in working in workgroups, to focus on specific >> areas (or goals)? >>> >>> (I know there are some ideas/work around the UI going on, but I will >> post the Seville details and notes about that in separate discussion >> thread.) >>> >>> Thanks >>> Sharan >>> >>> >> >
