Talk:Compiere

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Java Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Java, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Java on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JavaWikipedia:WikiProject JavaTemplate:WikiProject JavaJava Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter. Computing: Software / Free and open-source software This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software. This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

This article was nominated for deletion on January 9 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Apart from Adempiere what other projects are based on Compiere? Gioto (talk) 06:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Posterita is retail Web pos and it is using Adempiere/compiere architecture to provide retail front end. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandre Tsang (talk • contribs) 10:52, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who thinks that PostgreSQL doesn't support stored procedures should go read the documentation. Not only does it support them, it supports them in multiple programming languages and as triggers or constraints for most SQL operations.

Several paragraphs of new material were recently added by user Red1 D Oon. The material can be seen in this diff. I hate to do it because there's good information in there, but I reverted this material for the following reasons:

• It's unsourced.
• It makes some statements that could be seen as in rather blatant violation of WP:NPOV -- "The only possible competition it seems, is from itself", etc. Those statements could be made acceptable if they were credited to particular sources, and if a reasonable attempt was made to find criticisms to present a balanced viewpoint to the reader. But in its current unsourced form, it comes across as a statement of opinion of Wikipedia itself, and that's not acceptable.
• It includes a very prominent plug for an external site, red1.org. It seems very likely that Red1 D Oon is the owner of this site. That immediately raises red flags under numerous policies -- No original research and Vanity guidelines: Citing oneself most of all. Kickaha Ota 05:06, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reading back what i wrote for Compiere, yes i admit i did cite sources under my care at the bottom, and if that is against policy then i don't mind it be reverted. But i wonder if the rest which are not to my vanity nor interest can be published as there wont be any challenge as to non-source. I am merely stating careful facts and hopefully other source reference can counter, but i do not see how, because we ourselves are pioneer independent users of Compiere and vantagely knows for sure the contextutal history. Of course again we cannot site own opinions which are published in many prominent locations in the forums, and have received acceptance by the community. But been made a user-community leader puts my activism in a catch-22 spot. The only solution is for others to review those points and publish back of what the leader of the community here insist as history i.e. "Compiere is a first mover in its class..", FWIW - Red1 D Oon 00:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the contributor who added the ==Adempiere spin-off== section, which includes a link to the red1.org forums, I'm now concerned that the link is in direct violation of WP:EL#Links_normally_to_be_avoided item 10. Does anyone more wikiniscient than I have a suggestion on how to correct this situation without creating the need for a {{fact}} tag? --Donperk 19:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, I'd say the link is okay, since this is the "original" source to verify the given claim. The rule says Links normally to be avoided and here is in my opinion an exception. --S.K. 15:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Posted today: http://www.consona.com/News/compiere-acquisition.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.115.3.162 (talk) 15:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed nominated for deletion template. The article may have problems, but it still provides useful information. Its not an imaginary product! --Alan (talk) 16:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So it exists, and is useful. This does not imply meeting the inclusion criteria. The article is still eligible for an WP:AFD nomination. Keφr (talk) 16:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Compiere encompasses ERP functionality, but in order to avoid the duplication of information and the need for synchronization, it's organized in a different way."

I'm not aware of these issues, so it appears to be salving a non-existent problem. SAP certainly doesn't have them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.64.129.73 (talk) 12:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Compiere. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150306035906/http://www.accorto.com/about/management.html to http://www.accorto.com/about/management.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:44, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]