You are right, it's time to start a new thread, this one is now too confusing.
Jonathan (Schikowski) just told me he will answer us today. I'll wait his answer to start this new thread. It will not be only about demos since it seems we are ready to discuss of that again.
Also I just stumbled upon this "Ecommerce Portal Enhancement" Rishi's message by chance http://markmail.org/message/i35qxjelze2x4sja. It shows there are interests in ecomseo and Rishi started with very useful elements I think and others added some also. Jacques Le 25/01/2017 à 09:29, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
Jacques I'm lost! The message we are discussing is how to handle the two ecommerce webapps, and you are going all over the place by talking about things like: - a historical argument about ecomseo - an OFBiz fork - community over code - human What does all of the above have to do with what we are discussing? On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:Hi Taher, Le 25/01/2017 à 08:03, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :Hi Jacques, I think you might be mixing up "multiple webapps" with "duplicate / entangled webapps" in your examples. Yes we probably have other things to get rid of, but I think we should avoid working in the direction of increasing the entanglements instead of fixing root causes.Sincerely I was really proud of myself when I thought about and implemented this solution (then temporary in my mind). When Anil kinda imposed a veto on ecomseo and I had no time to prove that we could still use the contents way with ecomseo. I still see it as something very clean which allows to easily compare the 2 solutions w/o any burden on the legacy. Anyway, my intention was then indeed to compare and argument to replace the ecommerce webapp by ecomseo (which would then be renamed ecommerce). It seems we are ready for that, are we? Also I don't see the point of bringing comments about a differentdiscussion and references to a fork of OFBiz to this discussion and rant about it?Human, I'm an human not a robot. This remembers a joke we had with Andrew Sykes in the early days. A lot of the code we still rely on has been writing by Andrew Zenesky (you cleaned some of it). We were "wondering" if actually Andrew (Zenesky) was not actually a robot. Because of the speed he was writing code! See? Human, "Community over code"[1][2] :) Jacques [1] http://communityovercode.com/ [2] http://theapacheway.com/On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: This argument looks more like a witch hunt to me.If you both think it's a valid argument against ecomseo then what about accounting, ar and ap webapps in accounting component ofbizsetup and ordermgr-js webapps in commonext component content and contentimages in content component marketing and sfa in marketing component facility and catalog in product component ical and workeffort in workeffort component What are your plans for those? We might decide to change that but it's so far a feature not a bug. We dropped the ecomclone which was just showing how to reuse a webapp in another webapp. I agreed about dropping it because ecomseo was also showing the same feature. We can simply document it w/o showing an example in code. I would not be against but we then need to document it in both readme and wiki. Now I can also agree about unifying the ecommerce component and then we need to compare the 2 webapps which are very similar. Actually we "only" need to compare the filters and servlets in both and decide which are the best. I think, but have not tested, that you can use content in ecomseo has it was abruptly advocated by Hans[1] and Anil[2]. Else we can merge this feature from ecommerce to ecomseo filters and servlet. BTW, I don't see good practises in Hans's and Anil's answers and sorry to say but I think the best answer then was from the regretted Adrian[3] Since then ilscipio has its fork[4][5] and will not contribute anything anymore, well done experts! So you see there is some resentments about this. Yes, people worked hard to contribute it with some other main features like "Solr" OFBIZ-5042 But I think we can go ahead and find a common ground for the best or the project, which is only what I have in mind. Jacques [1] http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/Proposal-URL-Generation-Ch anges-tp4639289p4639294.html [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312?focusedComm entId=13939116&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13939116 [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312?focusedComm entId=13942316&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issueta bpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13942316 [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scipio_ERP [5] http://www.scipioerp.com/ Le 24/01/2017 à 21:24, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : Small correction, I meant one component with two webappsOn Jan 24, 2017 11:21 PM, "Taher Alkhateeb" <slidingfilame...@gmail.com wrote: I have to agree with Scott, the approach here is wrong in my opinion. Mydefinition of mess is simple: you should not have two components with two webapps. A real root solution is to unify the ecommerce component with one webapp exposed instead of having all this hairy code and interdependencies. I also think this should be discussed more rather than just committed without a thorough review. On Jan 24, 2017 11:12 PM, "Jacques Le Roux" < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: Inline...Le 24/09/2016 à 06:20, Scott Gray a écrit : You're asking for opinions and I can't give one without any knowledge ofthis feature so I'm simply telling you that the lack of documentation is a hindrance to evaluation and adoption. I took a quick look at SeoConfig.xml and have no idea what most of it does. You don't need to change SeoConfig.xml by default.It seems to me that the comment there are not worse, and even better, than you generally find in such config or properties files in OFBiz Would you not like to have spiders bots continuously crawling it withoutany risk? I don't understand this question. I guess you know that most of the spiders bots which are crawling theweb are not doing for the good of websites and users. Better to prevent them to hurt in any way. OOTB the ecomseo webapp is better than the ecommerce on this aspect. And it's also better with and for valuable crawlers (Google, DuckDuckGo, youNameIt...). Pour demo instances and OFBiz OOTB at large would benefit from using only ecomseo. Replacing ecommerce by ecomseo is another matter, another step I'd say.It should have been the first step before any of this was committed but instead you pushed ahead and committed it as an alternative despite objections so now we have duplicated functionality and a messier codebase. Though I did not test it I don't think it prevents to use the contentcomponent in anyway as feared Hans and Anil. I just put it besides to end the discussion then, having other stuff to do... What makes you think we have a messier codebase? I was going to list out the current set of possible SEO approaches that nowexist in the codebase but it's all such an overlapping mess I can't make sense of it without spending too much time trying to figure it out. Yes, I agree we need to document that better, starting from OFBIZ-5312content People need to stop adding things they can't get consensus on, IMO the messthat results is worse for the project than any missing feature. I'll never understand why some committers are so desperate to see something committed that they'll push forward at any cost. Not every feature has to start it's life in the OFBiz repo. I wanted this committed because it's ecommerce webapp improved. I didit a way that did not hurt the legacy situation. It just offered an alternative. For me it's a better solution. And I'm surprised that you prefer to have "/control/" in each URL bydefault :/ That is not the deciding factor in this discussion for me. I'm against any change to the status quo until we get this mess cleaned up. I'd like you to define what the mess is and how you would want to cleanit. Thanks Jacques RegardsScott On 23 September 2016 at 20:34, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com wrote:Hi Scott, Of course there are real world users, did you see the references? Do we have a such document for ecommerce? No, so It's not a good argument to not switch the demo from ecommerce to ecomseo. Would you not like to have spiders bots continuously crawling it without any risk? Replacing ecommerce by ecomseo is another matter, another step I'd say. And I'm surprised that you prefer to have "/control/" in each URL by default :/ Compare https://ofbiz-vm.apache.org:8443/ecomseo with https://ofbiz-vm.apache.org:8443/ecommerce/control/main Jacques Le 23/09/2016 à 01:15, Scott Gray a écrit : Well for me it's a -1 until I hear some positive reviews from other users(and ideally committers). I don't like having two ecommerce webapps and my preference would be to merge the two into one, but I can't promote that idea without any group consensus that the SEO approach is good and well architected. A document describing the architecture would make that much easier and I'm amazed one wasn't supplied with the proposal, no wonder it sat there without much attention for so long. But since one doesn't exist we'll just have to wait until people have time/care to review it and/or use it and provide feedback. Regards Scott On 23 September 2016 at 00:07, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com wrote: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5312More athttps://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2214?jql=proje ct %20%3D%20OFBIZ%20AND%20text%20~%20%22seo%22 Jacques Le 22/09/2016 à 13:25, Scott Gray a écrit : By the way, is there any technical or user documentation for it? I haven'tlooked at it and don't have time to review the actual implementation right now. The link you provided doesn't offer much more than a sales pitch. Regards Scott On 22 September 2016 at 23:22, Scott Gray<scott.gray@hotwaxsystems. com> wrote: This mostly to somehow battle test it, even if I know it works well So does it need battle testing or does it work well? Have you deployedit to any production instances? Has anyone else? Regards Scott On 19 September 2016 at 01:27, Jacques Le Roux < jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: Hi, Maybe you don't know about or did not try it, but we have ecomseo a cloneof the ecommerce component tailored for SEO https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Search+Eng ine+Optimisation,+SEO+in+ecommerce I propose to use it as the default ecommerce demo. This mostly to somehow battle test it, even if I know it works well. As it's based on ecommerce, users should not experience a big changes, apart the changed URLs What do you think? Jacques
