On Wednesday 11 January 2006 11:05 pm, Derek Atkins wrote:
> However, I do want to ask how this distraction is going to help get
> G2 out the door?  And yes, I do consider this is a distraction right now.

Well, if we want a C binary to replace the scripts for G2, then it's fairly 
complete. From your reaction, I assume we don't now? I thought we did last 
week. It's not dependent on cashutil, it could be implemented in trunk 
without all the other cashutil build stuff. It just uses some code that I 
developed for cashutil/pilot-qof. (i.e. the CLI component works).

> Once G2 is out the door, great, let's work full bore on this, but right
> now we REALLY REALLY REALLY need to get G2 finished.

I thought part of that was to replace the init scripts with C. It's a bit of a 
change of direction in just a week, that's all.

It's safely hidden on the branch so it won't get in anyone's way. I'll find 
something else if a standalone gnucash2 C binary is not to be part of G2.

-- 

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: pgpPv1wOaDOtA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

Reply via email to