As a general principle, add-ons seem to be an excellent proposition - versatility much enhanced.
I'm curious about not including "invoices against goods/services" as a core part of the system. Even if it's modularised for convenience or structural reasons, it seems to me to be a fundamental function. David. Chris Travers wrote: > Hi all; > > I have been discussing on the -devel list some of the design choices > in moving from 1.3 to 2.0. I figure that the functionality elements > should be discussed here., > > What I have proposed is moving most of the functionality that > currently exists in LedgerSMB into add-on modules so that businesses > don't need to install everything. This would mean fewer dependencies > for most users, and fewer features in the minimal installation. > Eventually all the features that exist in 1.3 will exist there too. > > The key elements that I would like to see users comment on is: > > 1) Would you like to see an interface included in the default > installation for tracking addon modules and installing them? > 2) Would you be interested in seeing 2.0 released when the minimal > version is available even without addons? > > The minimal version would include: > > 1) User Management > 2) Chart of Accounts Management > 3) GL transactions > 4) AR/AP transactions/invoices without defined goods and services > 5) Basic vendor/customer management. > 6) Memorized transactions > 7) Full separation of duties (as per 1.3) for affected functionality > 8) Basic financial statements plus trial balance > 9) Two independent modules for handling payments/receipts would be > available out of the box and selectable during the installation > process. > > Other features (inventory, invoices against goods and services, point > of sale, etc) would be available as separate modules and available as > developed. This would allow these portions to be released on a > separate release cycle from the main application. This would also > open up these areas for alternate versions. > > Under this plan, we would generally expect most of the next few years > to have more addons developed for 1.3 than 2.0, and support for 1.3 > would likely be available for at least the next four-five years > (possibly much longer). That would allow people to upgrade as they > can without a lot of pressure. > > What do people think? > > Best Wishes, > Chris Travers > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval > Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs > proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. > See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev > _______________________________________________ > Ledger-smb-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Ledger-smb-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users
