As a newly born independent conslutant (er, consultant), I am working on an e-commerce system for my client. I am _very_ interested in helping develop a serious, high - end open source e-commerce system.
By e-commerce system, I don't mean "shopping cart" w/a pretty front end either. I mean something full of real commerce functionality, like: * interfaces for fulfillment processing * interfaces for inventory data sharing with other applications (probably legacy, in many cases) * interfaces for tracking shipping info. * either the ability to integrate with a good dynamic content system or have a good dynamic content system embedded in it * ability to dynamically modify product attributes and generate groupings of products on the fly * interfaces for credit card authorization and sales tax calculations * interfaces for customer service stuff
I have subscribed to the MiniVend users list, but haven't had a chance to read any of it.
I'm working with a Java servlet based commercial product which does quite a bit of stuff (all the stuff I listed above, but more - well, eventually, after they finish writing it!) and I would love to help bring an open source equivalent to the forefront.
Anyone have any thoughts on which of the existing open source e-commerce solutions is robust enough to handle a major enterprise's e-commerce needs?
I went to the e-commerce BOF at the Open Source conference but it sucked so badly, I didn't hear about any of the existing OS e-commerce applications. If I think I'm reading the market right, there is some crazy good potential for an open source solution here.
If anyone wants to discuss high end e-commerce solutions from the open source point of view, please feel free to get in touch with me. My goal is to be able to work on e-commerce applications which are primarily, if not solely, based on open source technologies.
As someone who has just started his own independent consulting business, I take some offense at the generalizations that contractors care only about $$. I do not work through a body shop, I work direct with my clients - they get a better deal monetarily and so do I. I think that the individual determines how they approach work and their employment status has little to do with how connected they feel to a project, etc. I think, that if anything, a contractor/consultant feels more (at least I do) that they should be doing a good job to justify their high rate of pay. I worked for almost 3 years in a Big 6 firm, then as a consultant for a Top 10 software company, then at a Top 10 newspaper, and I'm happier now as a contractor because I have one thing in more abundance than I ever had before, and that's FREEDOM! Granted, I'm not completely free vis a vis the needs of my current, full-time client, but I went to the Open Source conference two weeks ago because I wanted to go. Yeah, I had to foot the bill, but it was well worth it and more importantly, I didn't have to shuffle my feet in to The Man and ask permission to go to something that I believe will take my career to the next level in the next 3 years. I plan to never work for a body shop - I'd rather go back to full time employment than be someone else's ho. But as long as I can be my own pimp as well as a ho, then I'm pretty damned happy.
I got set up with NASE for $149/month for their PPO plan (similar to HMO but not quite as draconian). The limitation on this is that I have to be in-network (meaning here in the greater Houston TX area) if I get hurt - they'll pay for the trip back if I can be transported.
For another $30/month, you get the indemnity plan which covers you regardless of where you are, etc.
Also, NASE plan has the best vision plan I've ever had. My vision plan history was: Andersen Consulting: jack shit Informix Software: crappy voucher based system - some decent savings Houston Chronicle: jack shit SELF-EMPLOYED BARNEY BADASS: free lenses and eye exam, 60% off of frames (even fancy schmancy ones), 40% off of extra crap (coatings, etc.)
Not to imply that/. readers are of the bespectacled set...:)
Slashdot Mirror
As a newly born independent conslutant (er, consultant), I am working on an e-commerce system for my client. I am _very_ interested in helping develop a serious, high - end open source e-commerce system.
By e-commerce system, I don't mean "shopping cart" w/a pretty front end either. I mean something full of real commerce functionality, like:
* interfaces for fulfillment processing
* interfaces for inventory data sharing with other applications (probably legacy, in many cases)
* interfaces for tracking shipping info.
* either the ability to integrate with a good dynamic content system or have a good dynamic content system embedded in it
* ability to dynamically modify product attributes and generate groupings of products on the fly
* interfaces for credit card authorization and sales tax calculations
* interfaces for customer service stuff
I have subscribed to the MiniVend users list, but haven't had a chance to read any of it.
I'm working with a Java servlet based commercial product which does quite a bit of stuff (all the stuff I listed above, but more - well, eventually, after they finish writing it!) and I would love to help bring an open source equivalent to the forefront.
Anyone have any thoughts on which of the existing open source e-commerce solutions is robust enough to handle a major enterprise's e-commerce needs?
I went to the e-commerce BOF at the Open Source conference but it sucked so badly, I didn't hear about any of the existing OS e-commerce applications. If I think I'm reading the market right, there is some crazy good potential for an open source solution here.
If anyone wants to discuss high end e-commerce solutions from the open source point of view, please feel free to get in touch with me. My goal is to be able to work on e-commerce applications which are primarily, if not solely, based on open source technologies.
Wes Gamble
Bison Consulting
Houston, TX
weyus@att.net
As someone who has just started his own independent consulting business, I take some offense at the generalizations that contractors care only about $$. I do not work through a body shop, I work direct with my clients - they get a better deal monetarily and so do I. I think that the individual determines how they approach work and their employment status has little to do with how connected they feel to a project, etc. I think, that if anything, a contractor/consultant feels more (at least I do) that they should be doing a good job to justify their high rate of pay. I worked for almost 3 years in a Big 6 firm, then as a consultant for a Top 10 software company, then at a Top 10 newspaper, and I'm happier now as a contractor because I have one thing in more abundance than I ever had before, and that's FREEDOM! Granted, I'm not completely free vis a vis the needs of my current, full-time client, but I went to the Open Source conference two weeks ago because I wanted to go. Yeah, I had to foot the bill, but it was well worth it and more importantly, I didn't have to shuffle my feet in to The Man and ask permission to go to something that I believe will take my career to the next level in the next 3 years. I plan to never work for a body shop - I'd rather go back to full time employment than be someone else's ho. But as long as I can be my own pimp as well as a ho, then I'm pretty damned happy.
I got set up with NASE for $149/month for their PPO plan (similar to HMO but not quite as draconian). The limitation on this is that I have to be in-network (meaning here in the greater Houston TX area) if I get hurt - they'll pay for the trip back if I can be transported.
/. readers are of the bespectacled set... :)
For another $30/month, you get the indemnity plan which covers you regardless of where you are, etc.
Also, NASE plan has the best vision plan I've ever had. My vision plan history was:
Andersen Consulting: jack shit
Informix Software: crappy voucher based system - some decent savings
Houston Chronicle: jack shit
SELF-EMPLOYED BARNEY BADASS: free lenses and eye exam, 60% off of frames (even fancy schmancy ones), 40% off of extra crap (coatings, etc.)
Not to imply that
WG