Hi Adrian, For a change that may be substantial, could this approach be quite risky that a lot of time could be spent developing something that may not be accepted?
Many thanks, Chris Adrian Crum wrote: > > That is not how the open source community works. If anyone wants to see > this move along, they need to make the desired changes to their local > copy, create a patch, and submit it to Jira. > > As far as coordination is concerned, there is an "umbrella" Jira issue > for this already. Just make new Jira issues sub-tasks of it. > > -Adrian > > Michael Xu (xudong) wrote: >> hi, >> >> Like Bruno mentioned, this topic has been discussed over many times. And >> it >> is time to take some actions. I really think one or more leaders should >> lead >> the process. Otherwise, the discussion might be around for a long long >> time. >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Michael Xu (xudong) >> www.wizitsoft.com >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 7:41 PM, chris snow <chsnow...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Bruno, >>> >>> I would like to help. Are you coordinating efforts? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> Chris >>> >>> >>> >>> Bruno Busco wrote: >>>> Hi Michael, >>>> the framework isolation and a framework-only installation is >>>> definitely something the community as talken about many times. You >>>> will find several conversations searching the mailing list. >>>> >>>> We will have it sooner or later and any help you could provide on this >>>> topic will be much appreciated. >>>> >>>> -Bruno >>>> >>>> 2009/11/24 Michael Xu (xudong) <dong...@wizitsoft.com>: >>>>> hmm...I compared the article and the latest code from trunk. I don't >>>>> think >>>>> the diagram is consistent with codes. >>>>> >>>>> For example, from the diagram party doesn't depend on marketing; >>> however, >>>>> as >>>>> I mentioned in previous email, party entity definition does use >>>>> ContactListParty from marketing. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Michael Xu (xudong) >>>>> www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 | Mobile: (86) >>>>> 135 >>>>> 0135 >>>>> 9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Michael Xu (xudong) >>>>> <dong...@wizitsoft.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Just found an article about the dependency: >>>>>> >>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies >>>>>> >>>>>> < >>> http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBADMIN/Component+and+Component+Set+Dependencies >>>> From >>>>>> the component relationship diagram, it seems I have to include all >>>>>> components under framework and application in my new application. Is >>>>>> it >>>>>> correct? >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Michael Xu (xudong) >>>>>> www.wizitsoft.com | Office: (8610) 6267 0615 ext 806 | Mobile: (86) >>> 135 >>>>>> 0135 9807 | Fax: (8610) 62670096 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Michael Xu (xudong) < >>>>>> dong...@wizitsoft.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> hi all, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I try to build a new application using ofbiz. Basically, I want to >>>>>>> use >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> nice overall architect of ofbiz, theme mechanism and >>>>>>> Party/Permission/SecurityGroup. However, I found it is very >>>>>>> difficult >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> remove unnecessary components. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For example, entitymodel.xml from applications/party >>>>>>> uses ContactListParty, which is from marketing component. I think >>>>>>> such >>>>>>> dependency doesn't make much sense, as marketing is only an optional >>>>>>> component but party is a must. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What's the best practice for my case? Advices and clues will be very >>>>>>> appreciated. Thanks in advance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> Michael Xu >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://n4.nabble.com/about-using-ofbiz-as-a-platform-tp786778p933001.html >>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> > > -- View this message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/about-using-ofbiz-as-a-platform-tp786778p948290.html Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
