At the risk of revisiting a thread that is in many ways too long; I would like to say that as a user of SL and of LS (and indeed I am running SL 2.6.19 and LSMB 1.2.3 in parallel, transaction by transaction) that NEITHER is especially "easy" to install. I would also point out that each is easier to install than the PeopleSoft stuff my employer uses. I would also point out that both are more transparent than QuickBooks which was pretty easy (and mostly useless) for me.
If an SMB is going it alone without an IT person or Consultant, then neither SL or LS is appropriate. In reality the question isn't readiness for the public, but for end user installation. I like the direction that LS is taking: it has more than 1 core developer; it has an active community forming; it is more open to contributions and to 3rd party integration. I am ok with keeping the core team's feet to the fire with regard to issues of importance to me and/or the community, but I am not expecting them to fix all of SL's faults in code and community immediately. If you aren't ready for LSMB try back in a year... i bet we'll all be amazed. lostinfog P.S. Go Core Team Go, and thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-users mailing list Ledger-smb-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users
