[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Sharan Foga updated OFBIZ-636:
--
Sprint: Bug Crush Event - 21/2/2015
> OfBiz System Configuration Wiz
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Adrian Crum reassigned OFBIZ-636:
-
Assignee: (was: Adrian Crum)
> OfBiz System Configuration Wiz
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Adrian Crum updated OFBIZ-636:
--
Component/s: (was: INCORPORATING ISSUE)
framework
> OfBiz System Configurat
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marco Risaliti updated OFBIZ-636:
-
Component/s: (was: framework)
INCORPORATING ISSUE
> OfBiz Sys
David E Jones wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:42 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Thank you for the clarification!
Glad it helped... though I'm still left wondering why you're trying so
hard to argue with every point I make... is my thinking fundamentally
flawed somewhere? The idea of "making things
something in OFBIZ-1382, but no patch yet
A patch but not working today (13/dec/07)
was (Author: jacques.le.roux):
BJ has suggested something in OFBIZ-1382, but no patch yet
> OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
> -
>
> Ke
e configurator in OFbiz.
>
> - Original Message
> From: Jacques Le Roux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org; Jacques Le Roux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 8:30:16 AM
> Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
>
>
>
OK Chris,
I will have a look
Jacques
De : "Chris Howe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> No doubt it is. All tools that are used to configure an application are.
> RTFM is a much simpler response to accomplish the same
thing. ;-) The point isn't necessarily making a tool that makes life easier on
the 2
No doubt it is. All tools that are used to configure an application are. RTFM
is a much simpler response to accomplish the same thing. ;-) The point isn't
necessarily making a tool that makes life easier on the 20 or so people that
post to the dev list regularly, but to lower the barrier of e
ved. Just when it comes back up, if it's not changed
concurrently, it won't be accessible.
> >
> > - Original Message
> > From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:38:42 AM
> > Sub
There would be an ofbiz
reset
> involved. Just when it comes back up, if it's not changed concurrently, it
> won't be accessible.
> >
> > - Original Message
> > From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Sent
inal Message
> > From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:38:42 AM
> > Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
> >
> >
> >
> > Wow, I didn't even realize w
tly, it
won't be accessible.
>
> - Original Message
> From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:38:42 AM
> Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
>
>
>
> Wow, I didn't even
. Just when it
comes back up, if it's not changed concurrently, it won't be accessible.
- Original Message
From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:38:42 AM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
rties and ofbiz-containers simultaneously.
- Original Message
From: Jacopo Cappellato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:08:01 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
I think that system settings should stay in config files, no
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 12:38:42 AM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
Wow, I didn't even realize we were considering something to change
ports on the fly. Has anyone even done a proof of concept to see if
the various i
re committing it back to the file system.
- Original Message
From: David E Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:35:33 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
The transactional nature sounds wonderful, but what problem does it
actua
v@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:35:33 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
The transactional nature sounds wonderful, but what problem does it
actually solve?
-David
On Dec 14, 2007, at 10:32 PM, Chris Howe wrote:
> d) Load the config files in
containers simultaneously.
- Original Message
From: Jacopo Cappellato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 11:08:01 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
I think that system settings should stay in config files, not in the
database; i
2007 11:08:01 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
I think that system settings should stay in config files, not in the
database; if the goal is to simplify the configuration steps described
in the production setup guide, then there are probably different ways
of
addressing thi
I think that system settings should stay in config files, not in the
database; if the goal is to simplify the configuration steps described
in the production setup guide, then there are probably different ways of
addressing this:
a) deliver a separate set of config files already configured for
On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:42 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Thank you for the clarification!
Glad it helped... though I'm still left wondering why you're trying so
hard to argue with every point I make... is my thinking fundamentally
flawed somewhere? The idea of "making things easier for the user" i
David,
Thank you for the clarification!
I understand your point of view, but the idea that a user could muck up
existing data is true for all of OFBiz. How many emails do we see about product
catalog configuration problems? In addition, a user could delete admin
permissions using the Party Man
maybe start having the data files be the entities names.
Let the reader callout be used to sequence the data instead of compound
files.
that way the webtools export can be used to write the new file with new
data thru a service.
David E Jones sent the following on 12/14/2007 4:09 PM:
>
> On Dec 1
On Dec 14, 2007, at 6:06 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
De : "Jonathon -- Improov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Like BJ, I had also created my own configurator.
As for David's point about deployment management and version
control (of config files), I would
agree with Jim Barrows. Those who use the UI co
De : "Jonathon -- Improov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Like BJ, I had also created my own configurator.
>
> As for David's point about deployment management and version control (of
> config files), I would
> agree with Jim Barrows. Those who use the UI configurator would use it
> exclusively, and have
From: Chris Howe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:20:30 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
This is an area that I have some interest in. The Xindice stuff done
earlier this year may be of some help. Let me know when yo
Like BJ, I had also created my own configurator.
As for David's point about deployment management and version control (of config files), I would
agree with Jim Barrows. Those who use the UI configurator would use it exclusively, and have
someone in charge of documenting all the switches require
Crum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: dev@ofbiz.apache.org
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:08:53 PM
Subject: Re: OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
I think the point David is making (and I hope I'm not misquoting ;-) )
is that you could potentially
have two people trying to change the
I think the point David is making (and I hope I'm not misquoting ;-) ) is that you could potentially
have two people trying to change the same system settings - a consultant/system integrator, and an
admin or super user.
Chris Howe wrote:
I don't understand why there would be two paths to fi
I don't understand why there would be two paths to file modification. Why
wouldn't the UI Wizard write directly to the same file that holds the current
configuration information?
Adrian wrote:---
I agree with your view - having two paths to file modification c
David E Jones wrote:
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:22 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Marco's recent work in Jira brought this issue to my attention:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636.
I would like to start working on that feature. Since that issue was
created, comments have been made in othe
On Dec 13, 2007, at 10:04 AM, Walter Vaughan wrote:
Adrian Crum wrote:
At the same time, we do get requests for a configuration UI.
Any ideas on how I should proceed? Does anyone see a need for such
a feature?
Methinks the discussion should first be"the direction of OFBiz":
is it to be a
On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:22 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
Marco's recent work in Jira brought this issue to my attention:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636.
I would like to start working on that feature. Since that issue was
created, comments have been made in other discussions on the m
De : "Walter Vaughan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Adrian Crum wrote:
>
> > At the same time, we do get requests for a configuration UI.
> > Any ideas on how I should proceed? Does anyone see a need for such a
> > feature?
>
>
> Methinks the discussion should first be"the direction of OFBiz":
> is it
no real debate, me thinks.
there are two levels of configuration.
1) the level a non technical person can do, like configuring emails for
a store.
2) the consultant that may have to add more seed data, or reconfigure
the GL before it is loaded for a specific industry.
I see this as addressing t
Actually, this has been discussed in the past several times.
Some people in the community view OFBiz as an application framework that consultants or integrators
deploy for their clients.
Others see the possibility of OFBiz becoming an off-the-shelf software program. The specialpurpose
folder
Adrian Crum wrote:
At the same time, we do get requests for a configuration UI.
Any ideas on how I should proceed? Does anyone see a need for such a
feature?
Methinks the discussion should first be"the direction of OFBiz":
is it to be a OOTB solution with a small basic need for customization
Jim Barrows wrote:
I for one would like an easier way to setup the Chart of Accounts at
the very least. And map an organization to accounts in the chart of
accounts.
That would be handled in the accounting component. The screen I had in mind is for system-level
things, like the ones mentioned
If such a thing were created, and to avoid the stated problem, all
configuration would have to go into the configuration UI.
on the other hand, the counter to the conflicting configuration
changes is simple... if you provide a UI, those who like the UI, will
tend to use it exclusively, while those
this is something I implemented
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1382
it does not created new setup but simplly consolidates those in each
applications.
it does require a new entity, unless someone comes up with a way to
sequence the setups. It is used to enable the menus as setups are d
Marco's recent work in Jira brought this issue to my attention:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636.
I would like to start working on that feature. Since that issue was created, comments have been made
in other discussions on the mailing list that may have an impact on the implement
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Adrian Crum reassigned OFBIZ-636:
-
Assignee: Adrian Crum
> OfBiz System Configuration Wiz
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Adrian Crum updated OFBIZ-636:
--
Priority: Minor (was: Major)
> OfBiz System Configuration Wiz
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Marco Risaliti updated OFBIZ-636:
-
Component/s: framework
> OfBiz System Configuration Wiz
OfBiz System Configuration Wizard
-
Key: OFBIZ-636
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-636
Project: Apache OFBiz (The Open for Business Project)
Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: Anil
46 matches
Mail list logo
