Reopen the Desk 2.0 Discussion

I do not feel this topic should not have been closed. My moving it over to the new frappe forum, you’re essentially limiting the people who can comment on it to developers, when the missing opinions seem to be from users.

1 Like

Yes, it was close so it can be moved to since this topic is about frappe not ERPNext. I encourage @joshreeder to open the topic there.

The separation between frappe and ERPNext is much cleaner now.

Then there should be two discussions. I would argue that this is more of a user issue than a developer one and I don’t think we’ve heard from a lot of users.

We heard from several people who disagreed with @rmehta and then he closed the discussion. I don’t need to tell you that looks bad.


it is not a use or developer discussion. It is about where the changes are happening, so basically by redesigning the interface or what you call Desk 2.0 you are suggesting changes to Frappe not to ERPNext. Thats why it belongs to

You should by now understand the separation between Frappe as framework and ERPNext as a product built on top of Frappe framework

Imagine Frappe as lego pieces with different shaps and colours, then ERPNext will be the product you get by assembling those lego pieces together in different configurations. Therefore, if you wan’t different looks and colors…, you change the lego pieces not the way you assemble them.
I hope this gives better picture :wink:

1 Like

My point is that users of Frappe, the dominant and only statistically significant application running on Frappe, discuss their issues here. I am well aware of their separation and because of the tightness of their integration, I actually don’t think it’s cleaner; it’s more confusing to ERPNext users. I don’t think ERPNext users will participate in the Frappe forum much at all, certainly not on the day it launches. This approach will likely alienate people, just like closing issues that haven’t run their course.


Perhaps this is another example of what we are doing wrong. We are focusing more on how to do things rather than what/why to do things. The issue is that ERPNext has grown too big and current organization of features is quite confusing. Perhaps the solution lies in some changes at the framework level, but it is still being discussed. Without concluding that and looking at alternatives, moving this to framework problem is premature. What do we do when someone suggests an incremental solution which doesn’t require foundation change? Do we fork it back in the discuss.erpnext?

1 Like

I get the desire to keep stuff organized.

But there is no easy way to “move” the discussion honestly, we can shut it down, create a new one on a brand new forum with less than 60 users.

Why in the world did we not just keep Frappe and ERPnext community together?
The answer? “Well people are confused and tagging things Frappe when they should be tagged as ERPnext and vice versa.”

That problem is not solved by having 2 forums. The same people now have to be on 2 forums??? In my opinion, this is not a good idea and the pain of that choice will not get any easier. Just like I am sure that github tickets are a mess between the 2 as well.

You are requiring users go make another account on another forum and lose the historical context of the conversation.

I am all for “branching” the discussion between ideas and execution which I have done, but for the record I don’t think most people here know where Frappe and ERPnext start and stop. And I agree with @tmatteson this does not make the moderators look good, no matter the intent.

The should have requested we start a new thread there and linked to it, not shut this one down abruptly. Many users will be searching there, not on Frappe forum and we shouldn’t give people the run around linking threads. Who cares how long they get? That’s way better then having multiple threads about the same thing in my opinion.

We are all on the same team here, let’s stay open minded.