On 02/25/2012 05:12 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM, John Locke wrote:
>
>
>> I'd say the main difference is taking the standard centralized stuff one
>> step further than you've outlined, doing the URL parsing and establishing
>> conventions before handing off to indiv
>> Main things I'm thinking about needing here:
>>
>> - tracking employer, employee contributions to each of the
>> various taxes we need to pay, with variable rates for
>> each. e.g. unemployment insurance varies quarter by quarter and
>> employer by employer.
>>
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM, John Locke wrote:
>
> I'd say the main difference is taking the standard centralized stuff one
> step further than you've outlined, doing the URL parsing and establishing
> conventions before handing off to individual web service controllers.
>
> I've also found
On 02/24/2012 05:44 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
Ideally web services, like reporting, would happen after the main
transactional functionality is stable enough for early beta testing.
I think the first step is getting a framework in place that
defines the endpoints, the formattin
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:14 AM, John Locke wrote:
> On 02/23/2012 04:20 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
>
>
> Payroll varies a tremendous amount from state to state and from country
> to country. What we will have will be a framework for building systems
> which provide payroll functionality. It i
On 02/23/2012 04:20 PM, Chris Travers wrote:
Payroll varies a tremendous amount from state to state and from
country to country. What we will have will be a framework for
building systems which provide payroll functionality. It isn't clear
yet which locations will be supported. Because of
> "Chris" == Chris Travers writes:
Chris> Once the business unit code is all in and breakage corrected,
Chris> and the customer/vendor db redesign complete (nothing major
Chris> here, just a few tweakstweaks!), then transactional testing
Chris> can begin.
Chris> I would n
Hi John;
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 10:41 AM, John Locke wrote:
> Hi, Chris,
>
> Sounds good! Notes/questions below...
>
> On 02/23/2012 12:00 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
> > Hi all;
> >
> > I am finishing up what is probably the last of the major
> > backwards-compatibility-breaking features for 1.4,
Hi, Chris,
Sounds good! Notes/questions below...
On 02/23/2012 12:00 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
> Hi all;
>
> I am finishing up what is probably the last of the major
> backwards-compatibility-breaking features for 1.4, which is the
> rewrite of projects and departments. I expect to have trunk i
Chris,
On 2012-02-23 21:54, Chris Travers wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Philip Rhoades [1]> wrote:
>
>> I presume we could be testing from the beginning and if we are not
>> using the newly worked on features or the ones waiting to be worked
>> on,
>> we should be good? - in terms of
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:12 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote:
>
>
>
> I presume we could be testing from the beginning and if we are not
> using the newly worked on features or the ones waiting to be worked on,
> we should be good? - in terms of the data being maintained up to a
> proper release? My im
Chris,
On 2012-02-23 19:00, Chris Travers wrote:
> Hi all;
>
> I am finishing up what is probably the last of the major
> backwards-compatibility-breaking features for 1.4, which is the
> rewrite of projects and departments. I expect to have trunk in a
> usable (for testing) state within another
12 matches
Mail list logo
