Skip,
> First, I have read EVERY document I can get my hands on concerning Ofbiz
> ... nowhere in them is the <index> tag mentioned and I am betting many other
> equally cool features.
There's was a remark by Andy some years back, kind of apologizing for lack of documentation.
Reason given was that OFBiz is moving fast ahead, and had no resources for documenting.
I agree OFBiz is not very friendly to non-technical folks now. But then, there's money to be made
in that market! :)
> Which brings me to point two. Not everyone functions as you do reading xsds
> and such.
Which is why those of us who do read them (plus corresponding Java codes) make a living doing
training.
In fact, I'm setting up a center in Singapore next year Jan, probably. I need more OFBiz
programmers here.
> Furthermore, not every element choice in an XSD is obvious in its use and
> their existance is not a good substitute for notes from the author.
Worse than that, some XSD elements are not implemented. But those are quite
rare, I'd say.
You will always need to get to the source (Java) to "read" OFBiz "documentation". I've been doing
that since day 1 with OFBiz. The source is like an open book to me.
> "And where do you see yourself in this picture Skip?" I had hoped that was
> obvious.
Sigh. Let's not put anyone into roles here. We're all here for ourselves. To be here *not* for
ourselves would be irresponsible. We all need to take care of ourselves, so we don't become a
burden to others, I mean.
If David and other committers were robots, maybe things would've been different.
We're humans. :) We have just 2 options when dealing with humans. Like it or hate it. I prefer to
like it. :)
It's nice to have you join us, Skip!
Jonathon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David
I seem to have hit a sore spot. That was not my intent and I apologize. I
will limit my response to a few comments. First, I have read EVERY document
I can get my hands on concerning Ofbiz including all the ones in your link
below. I even downloaded and printed the more informative ones which I keep
for a reference. I for one am most appreciative for their existance. I
have watched all your training videos at least twice. I have done all of Si
Chens things as well. All were very helpful. However, nowhere in them is
the <index> tag mentioned and I am betting many other equally cool features.
Which brings me to point two. Not everyone functions as you do reading xsds
and such. Furthermore, not every element choice in an XSD is obvious in its
use and their existance is not a good substitute for notes from the author.
I personally like to have references I can look at. However, I understand
that not everyone works like me so I comment my code as well.
I did not suggest that documention should be required from submitters. What
I said was "It is a simple matter to request ...". Right now there are
submission guidelines that cover such things as code formatting. It is not
"required". It sez that your code is more likely to be adopted if you
follow these guidelines. The same thing could be said for documentation.
As for saying that I would rather the <index> feature did not exist, the
answer is that it did not exist for me till I found out about it when Adrian
so kindly pointed it out.
"And where do you see yourself in this picture Skip?" I had hoped that was
obvious. I have contributed lots of code to date and will will continue to
make contributions knowing full well that the majority will never be
adopted. I expect that is more than most. I will continue to do so over
the coming years as I am committed to several Ofbiz projects. It is true
that I dropped off the dev mailing list, but that does not mean that I am
not willing to help if asked. I just got tired of the hassle and felt my
time was better spent writting the code myself instead of debating it.
Skip
-----Original Message-----
From: David E Jones [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 2:35 PM
To: user@ofbiz.apache.org
Subject: Re: Entity engine, "many" relations, foreign keys
On Dec 4, 2007, at 3:07 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ah well, "undocumented" is probably not the right word given that we
all
have the source. Perhaps "hidden" might be better? But no, that
would
imply the intent to hide something which is surely not the case.
Perhaps
"unpublished"?
This is all tongue-in-cheek David. My point is that here is a
really cool
feature that went un-noticed by me after looking through all the
documentation and a substantial part of the source code, including the
documentation in the link you provided. Someone added this feature,
apparently a couple of years ago, but did not take the 5 minutes to
note its
existance.
You think that's all it takes? Then why don't you do it? ;)
It is a simple matter to request that submitters provide at least
minimal
documentation for new features that the committers can then include
in the
base documentation, especially in the entity and widget and other
"engines".
I'm pushing 80 hours a week trying to stay on top of earning a living
and doing what little I can to keep OFBiz moving. Why should I also
take on the responsibility of speculatively training every possible
user?
Oh wait, I did that, but in order to afford my own over-encumbered
time it is only available for a charge, and yes this and much more
information is in it, hence this link:
http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBTECH/Framework+Introduction+Videos+and+Diag
rams
Follow the link to the more complete package, that's just an
introduction.
There is no value in any software if the implementer has to spend
countless
hours experimenting and digging through source code to implement
some new
feature, fun as such an exercise may be.
Oh yeah, then why does OFBiz exist with NO central organization that
sponsors it and pays people to work on it? Why do so many people use
it in spite of this fatal weakness?
And who sez that "Documented features are somewhat the exception,
not the
norm." in open source software. I can point you to scads of open
source
software with excellent documention, and some of it used by Ofbiz
itself
(ftl and tomcat come instantly to mind).
Did I say that was the norm for open source software?
Again to paraphrase Johnny Depp in Willy Wonka and the Chocolate
Factory: "you're funny".
Also, have an overview look at the most successful open soure
projects. All
(that I know of) are very well documented. The success of any open
source
project is determined by its committers and the quality of their
code. The
more committers, the more successful the project becomes. You get
more
committers with good documentation.
Wouldn't that be nice! I may have a jaded view, but I think marketing
and such have a stronger effect when it comes to mass adoption.
I really agree though that more committers and good code quality are
important for a community-driven project.
This might seem funny, but I don't agree that good documentation
attracts more committers. If people can stay distanced from the
project and be only a consumer and not a collaborator, many will just
do that and not see the value in learning more about the software or
contributing to it.
This is not so say that Ofbiz documentation is bad. It's just not
as good
(read that complete) as it could be with a few policy changes.
Policy changes? You mean don't accept contributions without full
documentation?
No thanks, I'd like OFBiz contributions to increase, not decrease.
Are you saying you'd rather this feature did NOT exist, than to exist
with documentation that doesn't meet your standards? BTW, my opinion
on docs: forget them, they are slow and in efficient, I want to look
at the XSD file and see what exists as it's way faster and usually my
XML editor looks up the options and their in-line docs for me.
And where do you see yourself in this picture Skip? A critic and user
who is outside the community and can help most effectively by
complaining? Something else?
How do the people behave who are contributor-users of OFBiz, ie the
ones that have created all the stuff you are complaining about?
If I had $50 million in the bank and wanted to create something like
you are dreaming about then maybe it would exist... but it's not that
way... I'm just a broke programmer and business analyst working with
others to create something that is cool and useful for all of us
involved, and as unencumbered as possible so that it remains that way
and makes a difference in the world.
Nothing personal about you, BTW, lots of people misunderstand what a
community-driven software project means. I think it's mostly because
of the mountains of manure that "open source" companies push on the
world, ie the ones with traditionally developed products that are
partially open source (dual-licensed, etc, etc) for the sake of
marketing.
-David
