Developing a reporting module

[soper]

To my simple mind, by some distance the most useful contribution that could be made to open source sugar would be a module that replicated the function of the pro & ent reporting modules, especially forecasting.

If anyone is interested in doing this, I'd be interested in contributing. I'm not a developer but would be more than happy to chuck in admin time and do the documentation.

If the child (os) is to keep up with the parent, then it desperately needs this. Without reporting, the os version is pretty valueless for business purposes (I suspect the sugar execs know this).

Anyone? ...............

[alsutton]

SugarCRM OS serves all our needs without reporting. We use figures from our eCommerce solution and Content Management System for forcasting, and Sugar doesn't integrate into those at the moment.

I'm sure the Sugar guys know that many businesses would like reporting and would find it extremelyuseful, but it's a long way from a must have. The businesses that absolutely can't live without it probably have the cash to spend out on a few licenses .

[soper]

Mmmmmm. If I'm a Sales Director at XYZ Widgets INC and I have 10 sales guys, then abosultely I want reporting. I have a board to report to, a business that cannot plan effectively without information and an absolute need to identify strengths, opportunites and weaknesses in my sales team.

The open source Sugar delivers none of that to me.

[techex]

I agree Soper, for most businesses a reporting module is an invluable part of any CRM.

I too am not a developer, but like Soper will help wherever possible...

Rich

[soper]

OK, here's a wee suggestion.

I know lots of developers, mostly Java and C++.

If anyone can put together a specification and an estimate of effort, I'll do my damndest to get it built. I'll even pay for it. AND I'll make it available to the community .... Free Of Charge .... like open source should be and that some "open source" Sugar add ons aren't.

Any takers?

[soper]

Oh, and I'm kind of realxed as to whether it's client or server side as long as it doesn't create dependencies.

[alsutton]

Mmmmmm. If I'm a Sales Director at XYZ Widgets INC and I have 10 sales guys, then abosultely I want reporting. I have a board to report to, a business that cannot plan effectively without information and an absolute need to identify strengths, opportunites and weaknesses in my sales team.

The open source Sugar delivers none of that to me.

If the business can afford the salaries, taxes, etc. included in employing a director and 10 staff dedicated to sales I'd be surprised if the business couldn't afford $40 a month per employee (or $239 a year if the install is located in house) for the pro version.

We take the long view, if we help churn out the odd module or two that rival part of the pro or enterprise products then we damage Sugars revenue stream, and if Sugars revenue stream starts faltering they'll be given the usual options by their VC company;

1) Charge for more things (e.g. remove the open source version from the market, or put more functionality in the pro version and less in the OS version).

2) Close up shop (and the VC guys cut their losses).

Either way we (as OS users) loose out, (Either by not getting as much functionality as we could have got, or by not getting the product developed and supported at the rate it currently is), and for us thats a big turn off.

[soper]

We take the long view, if we help churn out the odd module or two that rival part of the pro or enterprise products then we damage Sugars revenue stream, and if Sugars revenue stream starts faltering they'll be given the usual options by their VC company.

I'd suggest that's the short view. It's the same proprietary vendor, lock in model as practiced by Sun, Oracle, SAP etc. If you're happy with that fine.

The long term view is that open source derives revenue from support and service and not from intellectual property rights assertion.

The long term view is tthat as the community gathers momentum, it will write complementary functionality that fills in whatever gaps Sugar leave.

That Sugar has a bastardised open source model is not a particular concern, neither is their revenue stream. 95% of the functionality is in the wild as open source and that's what I would thank them for.

[eden]

I agree. I think that a reporting module for the OS version is extremely important.

As the OS version is advanced by the community, and improved upon, it will also drive Sugar to greatly improve thier professional and enterprise versions, to continue to be a step up from the OS version.

Reporting is key. Without reporting you have data. Reporting provides you with information needed to make better informed business decisions. The OS version is nice for managing sales, contacts, etc, day to day. However, when you want to find out where you product or service is selling most, in what industry, which lead source has been most effective over the last 3 months, etc, you need reporting functionality.

I am more than willing to participate in an initiative to develop a reporting module for the OS version, as I think it is by far one of if not the most crucial and important part of the application.

[jserio]

I also agree that a reporting module is critical. We manage just 5 outside salespeople, pay based on contacts made, and now I'm confronted with needing to query Sugar databases for the data we pay by.

I'll add that I also agree that either Sugar is OS or it's not. To create a faux OS version, only as a tickler to the other versions isn't exactly in the spirit of OS.