On 17 Jul 2008, at 08:59, Dirk Uys wrote:
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Stroller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The screenshots of this look really nice, however to me this seems
like a
really odd motivation for writing a program:
I started developing it when I couldn't find a personal database
program for KDE which didn't using a SQL backend.
What's wrong with an SQL backend that needs you to re-invent the
wheel?
...
I don't print that
often, so why would I have the CUPS daemon running 24/7 when I print a
page once every two weeks?
There's probably no cost to having the CUPS daemon running 24/7 - it
starts up, the o/s sticks it in virtual memory when it sees you're
not using it and then reloads it to RAM when you do.
Other than that there is also the added complexity to the
installation. You have to create a user in the database, create the
database and grant the user all the needed permission to that specific
database.
Well, ideally the distro should handle all of this. Or have a "setup
manager" app.
And what if one app prefers mySQL and another one postgreSQL?
Agreed. This pisses me off no end. I'll bet the two are a pain to
manage side-by-side on the same machine.
The app should at least give you the option to use somethings else
like SQLlite.
Well, I have to say I was suspicious of Tellico's choice of XML flat-
files, when this option is available to it, too.
But, that is just my viewpoint and I felt like I had to defend the
developers motivation.
You don't need to defend your viewpoint at all. I mean, it looks like
a great app, so I'm not criticising it. It just seems odd, os all,
that he cites reluctance to use an SQL backend as his main reason for
developing the app, then doesn't explain further why he thinks that's
a problem or why his way is better. True, it makes a big difference
to setup, but I would have thought there were loads of features that
would be more obvious during the end-user experience that would
better distinguish an app.
Stroller.
--
[email protected] mailing list
