Chris,
Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Which do you think is more beneficial to the project in the next six
>> months:
>>
>> a) Taking a piece of code that might be architecturally questionable
>>but doesn't crash, doesn't corrupt data, and doesn't cause any
>>visual probl
Quoting Josh Sled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Personally, I'd be willing to forgo all the in-dev code (book-closing,
> lots, budgeting and DB-backend) in order to get the next release out the
> door, in order to unblock starting those other changes.
I've already given up on the DB backend for the firs
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 09:54 -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Then why spend time on it _now_? I'm not saying not to spend time on
> it. I'm just saying that it shouldn't be a priority _now_. Help us
> get g2 out the door so we can ensure gnucash's survival. _THEN_ feel
> free to really start rippi
It sounds like we agree there's a problem. But we disagree somewhat
on the analysis of the problem, and therefore the solution.
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 09:54:48AM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Chris,
>
> Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Which do you think is more beneficial to
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:22:53AM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Quoting Josh Sled <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > Personally, I'd be willing to forgo all the in-dev code (book-closing,
> > lots, budgeting and DB-backend) in order to get the next release out the
> > door, in order to unblock starting th
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 11:18 -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> If it only works as well as 1.x, why are users going to be any more
> pleased with g2 than 1.x? Do you think the average user knows and
> cares what libraries their acct package uses?
No, but they do care that they can package-managemen
> If it only works as well as 1.x, why are users going to be any more
> pleased with g2 than 1.x? Do you think the average user knows and
> cares what libraries their acct package uses?
No, but they care what libraries are included with their plug-and-play
distribution (where said distro's mainta
Chris Shoemaker schrieb:
I agree, but I think it's bad right now that devs aren't concerned
about getting g2 out the door. At least it feels to me that you don't
care about getting g2 released. Please tell me I'm wrong! But it
sounds like you'd rather rebuild working code now than wait until
a
Chris Shoemaker wrote:
<...>
See, I don't think it's of marginal benefit to get g2 into the hands
of the users even if it only works as well as 1.8. Indeed, currently
the g2 port does NOT work as well as 1.8! I think just getting it up
to 1.8's level is sufficient to make users happy and extend
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 11:39:08AM -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 11:18 -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
>
> > If it only works as well as 1.x, why are users going to be any more
> > pleased with g2 than 1.x? Do you think the average user knows and
> > cares what libraries their acc
On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 05:49:19PM +0200, Christian Stimming wrote:
> Chris Shoemaker schrieb:
> >>I agree, but I think it's bad right now that devs aren't concerned
> >>about getting g2 out the door. At least it feels to me that you don't
> >>care about getting g2 released. Please tell me I'm wr
I've been lurking in this conversation as its very muchout of my world,
though very interesting... my .02 below...
Dan Widyono wrote:
I <>
This does not match what I hear from regular users (non-computer-savvy).
They follow whatever their distro vendor provides for the most part. "The
dis
Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> BTW, my mini-projects at the moment are 1) looking at what's needed to
> remove GnomeCanvas from the register. 2) looking at what's needed to
> move the execution entry-point from guile to a C main. But more 1)
> than 2).
I think the simplest way to
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 08:34:10AM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > BTW, my mini-projects at the moment are 1) looking at what's needed to
> > remove GnomeCanvas from the register. 2) looking at what's needed to
> > move the execution entry-point from
Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 08:34:10AM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
>> Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > BTW, my mini-projects at the moment are 1) looking at what's needed to
>> > remove GnomeCanvas from the register. 2) looking at what'
Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > It's better to design out a bug than to patch it out.
>>
>> Normally I would agree with you. In this particular case, I tried to do
>> that three years ago and ended up throwing up my hands and declaring
>> that I had better things to do.
>
> I c
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 04:31:03PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Um, you clearly haven't read my posts over the last, oh, five years.
> I'm always the FIRST to stand up and list the things wrong with gnucash.
> David listed a few. A few more on my list:
>
> - the half-assed modularization effo
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 04:31:03PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> > It's better to design out a bug than to patch it out.
> >>
> >> Normally I would agree with you. In this particular case, I tried to do
> >> that three years ago and ended up thr
18 matches
Mail list logo
