Discussion:
XAF ERP Solution spawning from OpenERP - new Competitor?
forum-user-QGsdqg/
2009-09-22 16:12:17 UTC
Permalink
I thought this was interesting as it looks like another group is looking to convert the OpenERP/Python code to XAF.

http://community.devexpress.com/forums/t/80431.aspx

Based on the OpenERP Open Source license are they allowed to do this without referencing back to OpenERP? Just wanted to know from a general information sense.

It's nice to see the architecture and approach taken with OpenERP is viewed favorably by other development communities.

There is some interesting discussion about Microsoft Dynamics as well in particular from Garth Henderson on 9/18 in regards to their architecture.

------------------------
ChiefPenguin
Charlotte, NC
www.modernchannelstrategy.com

Technology. Sales. Marketing.




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44105#44105

-------------------- m2f --------------------
Ovnicraft
2009-09-22 16:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
I thought this was interesting as it looks like another group is looking to
convert the OpenERP/Python code to XAF.
http://community.devexpress.com/forums/t/80431.aspx
Based on the OpenERP Open Source license are they allowed to do this
without referencing back to OpenERP? Just wanted to know from a general
information sense.
It's nice to see the architecture and approach taken with OpenERP is viewed
favorably by other development communities.
There is some interesting discussion about Microsoft Dynamics as well in
particular from Garth Henderson on 9/18 in regards to their architecture.
Remmember, the architecture of Python is very important to develop of
openobject, i think this people are lossing time (sorry for this i hate c#).

We have a friends what they was investing about port openobject to Java and
the technical result was really complicated and project was rejected, and
another way ooor project is thanks Ruby lang.
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
------------------------
ChiefPenguin
Charlotte, NC
www.modernchannelstrategy.com
Technology. Sales. Marketing.
-------------------- m2f --------------------
--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44105#44105
-------------------- m2f --------------------
_______________________________________________
Tinyerp-users mailing list
http://tiny.be/mailman2/listinfo/tinyerp-users
--
Cristian Salamea
CEO GnuThink Software Labs
Software Libre / Open Source
(+593-8) 4-36-44-48
forum-user-QGsdqg/
2009-09-22 18:49:14 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

IMHO those guys are dreaming. They don't imagine what's the infrastructure and community behind OpenERP. Spending months porting a partial snapshot of it without the community/open source infrastructure will go nowhere past the uncertain initial announcement. Tiny just announced they fix some 25 bugs a day thanks to their infrastructure and community power...

Plus those guys are from Latin America, you ovnicraft is really in touch with the Spanish part of the Latin America community of OpenERP. I'm on my side behind the growth of OpenERP in Brazil now with initiatives such as http://www.openerpbrasil.com and a lot more to come. So we will defeat non collaborative forks/illegal clones, no question about that. It won't be the first failed fork of OpenERP.

Also, yes you could use OOOR ( http://code.google.com/p/ooor/ ) to integrate OpenERP and portals/Java stuff. Also notice that the coming JRuby 1.4 (see http://www.engineyard.com/blog/2009/5-things-to-look-for-in-jruby-1-4/ ) will be able to export Ruby baked object as regular Java objects + Java source that is invokable directly through Java code. Meaning that something like OOOR used on JRuby could generate standard Java interfaces to remote OpenERP much like OOOR but in the Java language for the nostalgics (example of JERSEY Java REST JRuby powered here http://github.com/nicksieger/ruby-jersey , a similar thing could live on the top of OOOR).

Also an other way to go is making sure OpenERP could run on Jython and thus access any Java lib you might need and be served by a standard J2EE server behind a WSGI gate. If Tiny is collaborating, if server-sa branch can finally be merged in trunk and if deprecated XML lib get kicked out just like mx.DateTime, then we can be on Jython as soon as Q1 2010, with perf improvements coming over 2010 and later.

------------------------
Raphaël Valyi

CEO and OpenERP consultant at
http://www.akretion.com




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44112#44112

-------------------- m2f --------------------
forum-user-QGsdqg/
2009-09-23 02:39:45 UTC
Permalink
The hardest part to reimplement OpenERP in a statically typed language is the way OpenERP modularization works. There's a lot of python wizardry going on. Not to mention, of course, the massive amount of modules.

But since "dream mode" is on, my wish for OpenERP version "who knows" :)

* Move to the JVM using Jython.
* YAML instead of XML
* Option of building modules using Scala (and being statically typed)
* A really extensive suite of unit and functional tests (no regressions!)
* Reliable multi-site sync
* Forget the one-software-to-rule-them-all mentality. More brainpower dedicated to integrating with existing functional solutions. (Pentaho for BI and ETL, Magento, SugarCRM, interfaces for HR, POS and Tax software integration)

I really think OS software should talk more...




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44121#44121

-------------------- m2f --------------------
forum-user-QGsdqg/
2009-09-23 03:42:34 UTC
Permalink
@cjalmeida
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
* Move to the JVM using Jython.
I wish this too. I mean at least Jython support. By removing deprecated XML lib, Tiny would also gain much easier distro packaging (especially for Windows) and thus better overall product image. Those who do not want to see the benefits (and coming perf gains) of the JVM will still run on JIT disabled C Python, no problem with that.
I'll track progress here:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openobject-server/+spec/jython-support-as-jython-improves
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
* YAML instead of XML
I vote for that too. Especially as the WYSIWYG designers are not mature enough yet and because we integrators always en up writing lot's of XML to cheat the framework.
I even created a blueprint for this months ago:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openobject-server/+spec/pyyaml-yaml-data-import
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
* Option of building modules using Scala (and being statically typed)
Once on Jython you could invoke whatever JVM language you like from an OpenERP module. Currently, integration between JVM languages are not yet like the .Net object sharing abstractions, it's much more low level procedural bindings. But the JVM guys are organizing themselves, some JVM languages said they are committed to adopt the new MOP (Meta Object Protocol). However such support is for the end of 2010 at best.

Now, core things in OpenERP could have been coded statically, provided you had a statical language as powerful as Python, which is certainly not the Java language bit could have been Scala or Clojure. I doubt the dynamic camp move to such engineering though. Anyway a good test suite could finally be build on such a large project, and hopefully language perf will be good enough already on Python in front of SGBD perf.
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
* A really extensive suite of unit and functional tests (no regressions!)
I vote for this too. At least Tiny built the continuous integration server infrastructure now. Hope they streamline the test writing process. In my opinion, supporting YAML, would also be part of the answer as it would allow 3x less typing to create markup based tests.
Post by forum-user-QGsdqg/
* Forget the one-software-to-rule-them-all mentality. More brainpower dedicated to integrating with existing functional solutions. (Pentaho for BI and ETL, Magento, SugarCRM, interfaces for HR, POS and Tax software integration)
I vote for this too. However, integration is usually harder than what people think at first (supporting versions changes, failures, security, configuration, constructing a double referential, mastering heterogeneous runtimes and dev environments, realtime/batch bidirectional webservices...) . So I agree to tell that currently Tiny thinks too much about OpenERP running the world alone but I ask for a balanced approach because in lot's of situations, rebuilding the feature in OpenERP is indeed cheaper than paying the cost of integration. It very much depends on the "adherence surface" between the systems.
On the contrary, integrating payroll from Saas cheap and correct solutions is sometimes so easy that you would never want to recode it in OpenERP.

BTW, I'm spending my time new teaming with Sharoon Thomas (Openlabs.co.in) to rebuild the Magento connector we prototyped at Smile. But hey Magento sucks. I'm eager Spree kicks its ass and going with Spree instead.

As for SugarCRM, I'm not sure, but I think OpenERP could quickly beat it natively as CRM is improved, may be during 2010/2011. Also I'm sure, the Sugar platform is nothing like Openobject one (so they will hardly resist) and the SugarCRM interface is not all this sexy past the few Flash graphics. Or even if Sugar will do much more out of the box, OpenERP could still win because it would more easily adapt to your real requirements provided little module coding and because of superior and immediate integration.


Dream mod off, back to Magento connector ;-(

------------------------
Raphaël Valyi

CEO and OpenERP consultant at
http://www.akretion.com




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44123#44123

-------------------- m2f --------------------
forum-user-QGsdqg/
2009-09-23 23:12:35 UTC
Permalink
Well, since dream mode is off, you mentioned something really bothers me: having to write unit tests in XML.

WHY? Unit testing seems to be better written using procedural statements. So why do we need to use a declarative (and verbose) lang like XML? Only data should be expressed in XML (or better yet YAML)

Also, there is no "test" context, the 'account' module assertions are done in "update" part of the lifecycle. If I'm writing extensive tests, I want my database in a known deterministic state. There should be a --run-tests argument when starting the server so it would do what the CI server does, but locally. And from the reports, important metrics are lacking like number of tests, coverage, etc. Now that the CI server is up, let's see how it goes.




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=44188#44188

-------------------- m2f --------------------

Loading...