There was a recent discussion on twitter about how to get to know BOPF better.

As all the mentions ( Gregor Wolf, Volker Wegert , Fred Verheul, Martin Fischer, Custodio de Oliveira, James Wood ) made it impossible to actually add content in a new tweet, this “blog” shall serve as container for longer messages. Let’s see whether this works out.

There is a course WDEBOF at SAP university which is an onsite-training. I’m a trainer for that course.

Let me give you some insights on the course:

  • Duration: The course is designed for two days. I never managed to get all the content even read in two days. For a serious knowledge-transfer, at least a third day is necessary. The inhouse-training at SAP took five days for the same content. When I held the course, I cut some advanced chapters in favor for excercises.
  • Content: ABAP is essential pre-requisite, but some architectural knowledge helps a lot. I even had the experience that an ABAP Newbie who was a good C# developer and architect showed the best understanding.
  • Location: The course is a class-room-training and I like it that it is. There’s usually a lot of interaction during the exercises (“why do I get this shortdump?”) and questions during the slides (“can this be compared to…?”). Having it in a VC would definitely require a different set-up (you can’t have persons 8hrs/day online listening). On the other hand, a code-jam is much too short if you want to productively use it afterwards.
  • Requesting a training: Apart from the planned dates which you can get from the course’s page, individual trainings also at other sites are common (to train a team of developers about to implementing something e. g. in TM).
    Therefore, I guess that it should be possible to request an offer by SAP for a custom training, even a VC – if there were enough participants joining.

Are you interested in participating? Leave a comment and we’ll see to the feedback.

Cheers,

Oliver

To report this post you need to login first.

5 Comments

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

  1. Volker Wegert

    It’s likely that the dubious hohor of having started the avalance will be attributed to me, so…

    I don’t really need BOPF right now for anything related to my current occupation or work-related projects – unless there’s been something going on that hasn’t reached me yet, BOPF is not in use within IS-H and i.s.h.med.

    However, I’m currently working on a rather large side-project in my own time that I use as a test bed to try out lots of cool new (well, more or less new) stuff that I haven’t had the opportunity to check out yet. BOPF is one of the things I’d like to get familiar with since it sounds interesting. As this is a private project, I’m not in a position to request a WDEBOF training, especially since training my co-workers in this framework would probably be of little use for them. I might be able to take some time off for a class-room training, but for me, a VC (or even paid-for access to high-quality training materials) would probably be the best option.

    (0) 
    1. Oliver Jaegle Post author

      I don’t really need BOPF right now for anything related to my current occupation or work-related projects


      […]


      especially since training my co-workers in this framework would probably be of little use for them.

      Whenever you create a Z-Table containing application data (type A) you need to think about how to integrate it transactionally. Thus, BOPF might make good sense although you don’t know yet that you need it 😉



      I might be able to take some time off for a class-room training, but for me, a VC (or even paid-for access to high-quality training materials) would probably be the best option.

      Maybe I (or someone else) should write a book 😉

      (0) 
      1. Volker Wegert

        Oliver Jaegle wrote:

        I don’t really need BOPF right now for anything related to my current occupation or work-related projects


        […]


        especially since training my co-workers in this framework would probably be of little use for them.

        Whenever you create a Z-Table containing application data (type A) you need to think about how to integrate it transactionally. Thus, BOPF might make good sense although you don’t know yet that you need it 😉

        Well, one could always use persistent classes… *ducks and runs*

        But aside from that, a big issue is how the cool new persistence and object management framework is coupled with the existing application. I’m curious how BOPF achieves that. In i.s.h.med, when we need A tables, chances are that we’re talking about medical documentation, and we’ve got our own “application generator” named PMD (not related with the famous source code checker) for that.

        Oliver Jaegle wrote:

        I might be able to take some time off for a class-room training, but for me, a VC (or even paid-for access to high-quality training materials) would probably be the best option.

        Maybe I (or someone else) should write a book 😉

        I’m inclined to reply both “yes” and “no”. As a prospective customer – yes, please do, I would already have bought it if it was available. However, writing an entire book is an awful lot of work. BTDT – I’ve written a set of books about said “application generator” myself (and for lack of interest without the “help” of a publishing company). It was a fun and interesting experience, but I know why I didn’t do a time sheet for this particular project – that would have turned out really depressing…

        (0) 
  2. Brandon Stickel

    Hi Oliver,

    I would be very interested in a training session. Is this something that is still offered? I’m sure I could get a few other participants from my company as well.

    Thanks!

    (0) 

Leave a Reply