On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote: > Atlassian provides graciously tools like Jira and Confluence to the ASF.
That suggests a healthy relationship between the open source sector and the commercial sector. That is nice to see. > Did you know that Jira underneath uses the OFBiz Entity Engine? > No I didn't, How, then, does the Jira feature set compare with the features provided in OFBiz for work flow management and issue tracking? BTW, I have lately taken a closer look at Redmine, and am curious as to how it's feature set (with some of the more interesting Redmine plugins), compares with Jira. Cheers Ted > Jacques > > Le 19/09/2014 18:20, Ted Byers a écrit : > >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Ron Wheeler >> <rwhee...@artifact-software.com> wrote: >>> >>> They are suggesting that you will use the one that OFBiz already has for >>> that purpose. >>> Nothing new to do. Just create the module identification and then the >>> issues >>> that you need in order to define the work on the Workflow project. >>> >> I am suggesting nothing of the sort. Rather, I am just curious as to >> who pays for the use of this particular commercial product. And, I am >> curious as to what open source alternatives exist and how they >> compare. >> >> As a software engineer, I HATE reinventing the wheel. Thus, if I were >> involved in OFBiz much earlier in its development, I would have >> suggested facilitating use of it WITH SugarCRM (or it's competitor, >> whose name I have quite forgotten at the moment), instead of >> developing a whole new contact management system within OFBiz, and for >> content management, I would have suggested facilitating use of OFBiz >> WITH Wordpress, again instead of developing a whole new content >> management system. But then, if the available options for particular >> tasks is deemed wanting for whatever reason, I'd have no objection to >> the development of new code, either to try to use these (obviously >> open source) products while adding code to address perceived >> deficiencies or to create a competitor de novo (there are sometimes >> good reasons for doing this too). >> >> But, in this present context, I am only interested in the cost of the >> present practice, and who pays, and the decision making process that >> led to use of jira instead of the alternatives (if there are viable >> alternatives). Understanding this may well inform my own decisions in >> the not too distant future. >> >> I am not, at present, interested in recommending changing anything, >> especially if those who are actually doing the work are happy with >> what is presently in place. >> >> Cheers >> >> Ted >> >>> Rn >>> >>> On 19/09/2014 11:34 AM, Ted Byers wrote: >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Adrian Crum >>>> <adrian.c...@sandglass-software.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Typically, this sort of thing is done in Jira - which provides a set of >>>>> collaboration tools and a means for voting on the change. >>>>> >>>> Jira is proprietary; so who pays for it? Or, is it free for open >>>> source projects, non-profit organizations or educational institutions? >>>> Is there not an open source equivalent? >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Ted >>>> >>>>> Adrian Crum >>>>> Sandglass Software >>>>> www.sandglass-software.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/19/2014 2:17 PM, Ron Wheeler wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I would suggest an virtual meeting as an alternative so that the team >>>>>> can decide on scope, initial tasks, priorities and project management >>>>>> structure. >>>>>> This should be followed by a note to the ML summarizing the discussion >>>>>> and decisions taken and could include an invitation to others to >>>>>> participate. >>>>>> >>>>>> This might save several weeks of dancing on the ML. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ron >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 19/09/2014 8:00 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Varun044, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The path is to work together with the contributors who pledged their >>>>>>> willingness to work on this. These are: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Hans Bakker >>>>>>> - Mohd Viqar >>>>>>> - Rong Nguyen >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The best place to do this is discuss it in this mailing list. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pierre Smits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>* >>>>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud- >>>>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional >>>>>>> Services and Retail & Trade >>>>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 1:54 PM, varun044 <varun...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks you for the prompt reply Pierre. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So, if I have to implement workflow in ofbiz now, which is the best >>>>>>>> path? >>>>>>>> Should I check into Activiti? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If you have some resources on the same, kindly share. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks again! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> View this message in context: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble.com/OfBiz-workflow-tp4655455p4655462.html >>>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ron Wheeler >>> President >>> Artifact Software Inc >>> email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com >>> skype: ronaldmwheeler >>> phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 >>> >> >> > -- R.E.(Ted) Byers, Ph.D.,Ed.D.
