Joshua D. Drake writes:
> > The migration to git would be most welcome. Would it not be better to make a
> > clean* svn to git conversion one time in the near future?
>
> We aren't migrating the SVN. SVN will be for 1.3 and below only. 2.0 is
> a clean cut.
I like a clean respository as much as
On 26/07/2010 22:01, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 15:45 +, Jeff Kowalczyk wrote:
>>
>> The migration to git would be most welcome. Would it not be better to make a
>> clean* svn to git conversion one time in the near future?
> We aren't migrating the SVN. SVN will be for 1.3
On Mon, 2010-07-26 at 20:31 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake writes:
> > I know many companies (mine included) that forgo the pain of payroll
> > and have a service do it.
>
> Sounds like much larger companies than I'm referring to.
Right and I think the larger companies can certainly
Subject: Re: [Ledger-smb-devel] Upcoming 2.0 of LedgerSMB
Joshua D. Drake writes:
> I know many companies (mine included) that forgo the pain of payroll
> and have a service do it.
Sounds like much larger companies than I'm referring to.
--
John Ha
Joshua D. Drake writes:
> I know many companies (mine included) that forgo the pain of payroll
> and have a service do it.
Sounds like much larger companies than I'm referring to.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:56 PM, John Hasler wrote:
> David writes:
>> This is why I do not think you should target the same market as
>> shrink-wrapped proprietary accounting software. I'm not trying to be
>> facetious, and I certainly don't mean to dismiss Free Software. I'm
>> just saying it
On Mon, 2010-07-26 at 17:18 -0500, John Hasler wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake writes:
> > There is a large swath of users that (millions) that if built properly
> > that we open up LedgerSMB to.
>
> Only when it handles payroll (in fact there's a large swath of users
> that supporting payroll would open
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>> > We *need* at least as an option to provide simple, easy to modify,
>> > preferably from the browser, templates.
>> >
>
> Or is a book keeper for a small business.
>
Small Business as a market means many things to different people. I
w
> From: David F. Skoll [mailto:d...@roaringpenguin.com]
>
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> > Spoken like a true geek. This isn't hard folks. The web has the whole
> > print thing down as long as you are using a modern browser. Simple
> > web-pdf tools exist as well.
>
> Color me skeptical. There a reas
David writes:
> This is why I do not think you should target the same market as
> shrink-wrapped proprietary accounting software. I'm not trying to be
> facetious, and I certainly don't mean to dismiss Free Software. I'm
> just saying it caters to a different market segment.
I have an acquaintan
Joshua D. Drake writes:
> There is a large swath of users that (millions) that if built properly
> that we open up LedgerSMB to.
Only when it handles payroll (in fact there's a large swath of users
that supporting payroll would open LedgerSMB up to with no other
changes.
--
John Hasler
jhas...
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> Color me skeptical. There a reason most small-business accounting
>> systems are *not* web-based.
> Quickbooks online
> Quicken online
> Microsoft Dynamics
> Netsuite
Yes, but how do they generate printed invoices? HTML+CSS or PDF that
bypasses the browser's rendering
> You just illustrated exactly why it needs to be done. A few steps up from
> writing postscript? NOBODY writes postscript.
> :D
Umm... I do. I do recognize that debugging Postscript isn't exactly a
mainstream skill, however . Nor do I do it more than once every four or
five years, nowadays.
On Mon, 2010-07-26 at 17:17 -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> >> If you are dreaming of a situation in which LedgerSMB is used *and
> >> customized* by "average" office workers, I'd say LaTeX is the least of
> >> your worries.
>
> > Spoken like a true geek. This isn't hard
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> If you are dreaming of a situation in which LedgerSMB is used *and
>> customized* by "average" office workers, I'd say LaTeX is the least of
>> your worries.
> Spoken like a true geek. This isn't hard folks. The web has the whole
> print thing down as long as you are usi
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 03:13 -0430, Walter Vargas wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello from Venezuela
>
> About the intention to eliminate LaTeX, I think, you can have
> something like templates in XML or DocBook, and then convert to other
> formats, including LaTeX.
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 15:45 +, Jeff Kowalczyk wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake writes:
> > Lastly, for 2.0 we are moving to Git. We have already created the
> > repository and will slowly begin to populate over the coming months.
> >
> > http://github.com/commandprompt/LedgerSMB
>
> The migration to
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 02:08 -0400, Luke wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jul 2010, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > 2.0 of LedgerSMB is going to branch soon. The primary goal of 2.0 is to
>
> Is there any intent to do a final release of 1.3, or will it continue to
> be worked on concurrently?
Yes. There will be
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 15:36 -0700, Gerald Chudyk wrote:
> Hopefully in the future there are enough templates to choose from, and
> at a sufficient level of completeness that Sue doesn't need to
> customize much. If she can create sophisticated spreadsheets from
> Excel templates and build Access d
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 18:08 -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > Latex may be great for you but if I walk into an office and say, "Sue,
> > here is how you customize templates" and its tex? I might as well walk
> > back out, cause she will have none of it.
>
> If you are dr
On 25 Jul 2010, at 19:02, Jeff Kowalczyk wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake writes:
>> I firmly believe we need to eliminate Latex or at least not make it a
>> requirement and move to more modern technologies to generate
>> invoices.
>
> I appreciate and like LaTeX output. LaTeX::Table [1] seemed like
On 24/07/2010 4:49 PM, David A. Bandel wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 17:08, David F. Skoll wrote:
>
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Latex may be great for you but if I walk into an office and say, "Sue,
>>> here is how you customize templates" and its tex? I might as well walk
>>>
Joshua D. Drake writes:
> I firmly believe we need to eliminate Latex or at least not make it a
> requirement and move to more modern technologies to generate invoices.
I appreciate and like LaTeX output. LaTeX::Table [1] seemed like something I
would want to build templates around. The problem w
Joshua D. Drake writes:
> Lastly, for 2.0 we are moving to Git. We have already created the
> repository and will slowly begin to populate over the coming months.
>
> http://github.com/commandprompt/LedgerSMB
The migration to git would be most welcome. Would it not be better to make a
clean* svn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello from Venezuela
About the intention to eliminate LaTeX, I think, you can have
something like templates in XML or DocBook, and then convert to other
formats, including LaTeX. In fact, one of the features that I like is
that I can make invoices in
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010, David F. Skoll wrote:
>> We *need* at least as an option to provide simple, easy to modify,
>> preferably from the browser, templates.
>
> How many people have asked for that? (Just curious.)
I don't know, but I lost one significant corporate customer in part
because of it.
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> 2.0 of LedgerSMB is going to branch soon. The primary goal of 2.0 is to
Is there any intent to do a final release of 1.3, or will it continue to
be worked on concurrently?
> eliminate all legacy code from our SQL-Ledger heritage. However, there
> ar
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 17:08, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Latex may be great for you but if I walk into an office and say, "Sue,
>> here is how you customize templates" and its tex? I might as well walk
>> back out, cause she will have none of it.
>
> If you are dreaming o
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 16:24 -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>
>> > I firmly believe we need to eliminate Latex or at least not make it a
>> > requirement and move to more modern technologies to generate invoices.
>>
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Latex may be great for you but if I walk into an office and say, "Sue,
> here is how you customize templates" and its tex? I might as well walk
> back out, cause she will have none of it.
If you are dreaming of a situation in which LedgerSMB is used *and
customized* by "a
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 16:24 -0400, David F. Skoll wrote:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
> > I firmly believe we need to eliminate Latex or at least not make it a
> > requirement and move to more modern technologies to generate invoices.
>
> What? Why? LaTeX produces beautiful output and makes it ea
On 24/07/2010 1:47 PM, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 2.0 of LedgerSMB is going to branch soon. The primary goal of 2.0 is to
> eliminate all legacy code from our SQL-Ledger heritage. However, there
> are other goals that others may have that I would like to start a
> discussion on.
>
> My P
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> I firmly believe we need to eliminate Latex or at least not make it a
> requirement and move to more modern technologies to generate invoices.
What? Why? LaTeX produces beautiful output and makes it easy
to customize the printed results. What do you propose to use inst
Hello,
2.0 of LedgerSMB is going to branch soon. The primary goal of 2.0 is to
eliminate all legacy code from our SQL-Ledger heritage. However, there
are other goals that others may have that I would like to start a
discussion on.
My Primary goals are:
I firmly believe we need to eliminate Latex
34 matches
Mail list logo
