further plans with guppi, bonobo?
Mon, 14 May 2001 10:52:58 -0700
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sunday 06 May 2001 06:20, Bill Gribble wrote:
> I think it makes sense; Gnucash really doesn't use the full generality
> of Guppi, and the guppitank interface is a reasonable abstraction of
> it IMO. I think there are plenty of things about guppitank that can
> be improved. But keep in mind how much stuff guppitank does! if we
> throw it out, we will basically have to completely reimplement it,
> with the main difference being that the source code is in the gnucash
> tree instead of the guppi tree.
Just for the record:
We will probably continue using libguppitank for the current graphs, i.e.
for those which are already implemented in libguppitank. If we want to
come up with more sophisticated/complex graphs, like a price plot with
variance bars and several average lines, then we might just use the full
generality of the Guppi API. Currently the code for the full-blown Guppi
API is kept inside libguppitank. In the future, instead of adding new code
for new graphs to libguppitank, we might just add the same amount of code
As a side-effect this won't require a Guppi update for any sort of new
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----