It's been rumoured that Alexandru Harsanyi said:
>
> "Plugin Arhitecture" is a cool espression, you can please anyone with it.
> But the question is do we need it? Not every program needs a "plugin
> arhitecture" (an extreme example would be the unix 'ls' command :). Im
> still using 'xv' instead of Electric Eyes. xv does not have a plugin
> arhitecture, it does not have extension languages, yet it fulfills my
> needs.
>
> Let's first make a personal finance manager that *works*, OK? Later we can
> augument it with CORBA, OLE, Java, DCOM, Python, Perl, Tcl,(your favourite
> language here) and we can even use INTERCAL as an extension language :)
Look, I think we are losing a few points here.
First, the goal of plug-ins is to enable more developers to create more
things for app XYZ; its a means of allowing many programmers to work on
the same code at the same time without clobbering each-others patches.
Gnucash doesn't have a plugin arch because no one has figured out how to
make one.
Next, the goal of ext langs is to enable developers to write new code and
new features more easily, creating better code with less time and effort.
These are things that are supposed to make life easier and bettr, I do not
understand the rational or emotional issues against them.
As to having code that "works", what part doesn't work? It works mostly
flawlessly for me; I've been keeping finances on it for half a year.
Can we talk doesn't work and fix that first?
--linas
----- %< -------------------------------------------- >% ------
The GnuCash / X-Accountant Mailing List
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
put "unsubscribe gnucash-devel [EMAIL PROTECTED]" in the body
