Chris,

Since I started having a need for a real accounting system again and, 
at the time, it looked like nothing much was happening with LSMB, I had 
started to look at PostBooks - the only other significant Postgres-based 
system available as far as I can see (other than SQLL).  Then when LSMB 
seemed to have a resurgence of interest and development work I started 
doing test installs of it - I REALLY want a substantially based RPM 
based install - I think this is a top commercial priority.  I have been 
doing this for some time now and appear to be close to a working system 
. . but not quite.  I think the priority of LSMB should be a seamlessly, 
painlessly installable version of 1.3 .  Don't get me wrong - I think 
that the forward planning you have been doing is great but starting work 
on the NEXT version when the current version is not really usable (as 
far as I can see) is not appropriate.

Just my 2c worth . .

Regards,

Phil.



On 2012-02-15 13:29, Chris Travers wrote:
> Hi;
>
> I am currently working on ripping out the existing project/department
> code and replacing it with something somewhat different and more
> flexible.
>
> The current approach generalizes projects, departments and other
> business reporting units into a single interface and will allow line
> items to be assigned to any of these interfaces.  This would allow
> funds accounting, as well as various exotic requirements like
> customer/vendor line item links (required by a few locations and
> industries) to be implemented without significant effort.  After
> this, my next priority is to finish up the payroll infrastructure I 
> am
> working on and revisit the customer/vendor handling.
>
> My own view is that this may be enough to carry me through the next
> month and a half, after which time we should probably be starting to
> think about firming things up for 1.4.   My priority after that will
> probably be on reporting, though I am still hoping to possibly at
> least start on the sales order rewrite even if it ends up as an 
> add-on
> for 1.4.  I think that reporting can be done late in the development
> cycle compared to functionality rewrites because it presupposes data
> in the database, and does not interfere with anything on the data
> entry side.
>
> Any feedback on this?
>
> Best Wishes,
> Chris Travers

-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW      2001
Australia
E-mail:  [email protected]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Ledger-smb-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-devel

Reply via email to