On Wed, 21 May 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote: > Luke wrote: > > On Thu, 22 May 2008, Terry Porter wrote: > > > I would really enjoy seeing a move in LedgerSMB to switch to a > > client-server arch. I think that is the real breakout step, enabling it > > to tangle with the other apps we've been talking about, and allowing the > > construction of more friendly interfaces. > > That is one the points of 1.3 and 1.4. It is why we are pushing all data > logic into the database with stored procs. It auto creates the api to > call, all you need is your protocol, whether ReST, CGI or direct libpq.
I kind of thought that might be some of the reasoning, just never heard anyone come right out and say it. Maybe more like I was hoping that was some of the reasoning. Since you're reading this thread: is anyone monitoring bug reports posted for 1.2? There are many still open on sourceforge, which make LSMB look bad imho, especially since some of them have been solved, and some are really large problems. Regards, Luke ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users
