>From my perspective as a noob to the community, you are nothing but a positive influence. The h/ledger split is the most amicable I've seen. Keep it up! On Mar 9, 2012 8:22 AM, "Simon Michael" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 3/8/12 3:56 PM, David Whitmarsh wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:37, Simon Michael<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> It's this word "probably" I don't like. For years we have been hearing >>> people in #ledger trying to do this or that thing recommended by the docs >>> which turn out to require a different ledger version or a different kind >>> of >>> build. I would like things to be definitely there or not there :) >>> simplifying installation, reducing new user confusion/frustration and >>> building more critical mass of people testing and discussing the same >>> set of >>> features. >>> >>> >> So you want free software which is written to scratch the itch of its >> main developer to stop adding features he wants to add? You've already >> forked it, if you want to chase ease of use/less frustration with your >> implementation then you should do that. I on the other hand appreciate >> the work John puts in to new features. >> > > > Just a little honest feedback, of a kind I never see here, offered in case > it might be useful to improve ledger, which I care about, contribute to, > and want to thrive. I hoped John knows me well enough to not take offense, > and I beg lenience... > > PS I'm not aware of any serious problem with the way I/hledger relates > with the ledger community.. if anyone is, please let's discuss. > > -Simon > >
