Herbert Thoma <herbert.th...@iis.fraunhofer.de> writes: > Hmm, I just would like to point out that GnuCash was kind of a script once: > It was a guile script that called the C/gtk/gnome code (OK, the GUI code > was not directly scripted). It took us a long time to rework this back to > a C application that called guile for the reports ... > > I am not that sure that an interpreted language is a good idea. But I am > an electrical engineer not a computer scientist. So I tend to prefer > languages that are closer to the hardware ...
Just to play devil's advocate, the guile/scheme modularization project back in the 1.4-1.6 days never finished. It was *supposed* to allow you to easily write guile scripts against various pieces of gnucash just by pulling in the necessary gnc modules. Unfortunately that never completed, so it still wound up being a single monolithic application... And a slow one at that! Moreover it was nearly impossible to debug. So reverting back to a regular C application was definitely the right move then. As for rewriting GnuCash now; I think it can be done piecemeal, but that means you need to write wrappers in order to have drop-in replacements. There's a TON of code; GnuCash is a HUGE application. I'm not advocating staying where we are, nor am I advocating moving to something new. I'm just trying to advocate that we make a choice with a clear understanding of the ramifications of our choice. W.r.t. Gnome3 v. Gnome2 -- I think historically we've tried to keep GnuCash compatible with the lowest-common-denominator stable release from 6-12 months prior to release. I think it's absolutely reasonable to say that your OS must be no older than ~1 year old in order to build GnuCash. I DO NOT think it's reasonable to require a user to be running yesterday's release of Debian/Unstable in order to build GnuCash. (And yes, this *was* the case for the original GnuCash 1.6 release -- pretty much NOBODY could build it because the dependencies were all bleeding edge). Considering gnome3 hasn't been released yet, I think it should be considered out-of-scope for GnuCash 2.6. I'd honestly like to see us make more frequent releases. I'd love to see a release a year. But historically we haven't had the development resources to do that. Either that or we picked projects that just too too long. Even the gnome1 -> gnome2 port took 18 calendar months (maybe more -- I'd have to look). -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH warl...@mit.edu PGP key available _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel