Derek Atkins wrote:
Please take this option! I used to be very anti-Micro$oft until I started learning about COM/DCOM. There are huge advantages to using this kind of component architecture provided that the security implications can be worked out - Gnome using unix domain sockets fits this bill nicely.
Another thing to consider: Linas and I had discussed (on this list,
IIRC), the possibility of making a Bonobo Server out of Gnucash. This
would allow other (gnome) applications to talk to GnuCash and perform
functions. Similarly, it would be nice if GnuCash would act like
Netscape, Mozilla, Acroread, or lots of other applications -- detect
if one copy is running and "pass" information across.. This would
make it easier to turn GnuCash into a web plug-in -- the web browser
could just call "gnucash", and it would either start a new one or, if
one was running, pass the information into the running gnucash.
One of the applications I would like to produce at some point is a general ledger running on my palm. When I sync it would upload its data to the gnucash engine. If we went with a raw socket interface I'd be left writing the interface code. If we went with SOAP I'd be left writing the XML messages. If we go with CORBA I can use the current object mapping and concentrate only on my app.
Great idea. What do we do to make this one a reality?
Alex.
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
