Is there anything *enjoyable* about our development process?

[Neil Williams]

On Sunday 16 October 2005 4:48 pm, Josh Sled wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 16:02 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
> > You make it sound like I'm hijacking gnucash.
>
> I don't believe that.

That's OK.

> I too want to see QOF be an external library that gnucash depends on.

My work will simply provide QOF externally if it is supported by that 
distribution - naturally that would tend to be Debian unstable and Debian 
like distributions initially although QOF, as packaged, does compile on FC3 
too.

> But in the interest of focusing all scarce resources toward finishing
> the G2 port, I think that should happen later.

It is 99% done. I'm completing the last part of the patch now. Remember that 
this is not a one-way street, just because QOF CAN be used externally, it 
does NOT mean it has to be used externally. It's a conditional build that 
will create a runtime dependency on external code in some distributions and 
create an internal library on others.

> > But in time for cashutil, which also involves structural changes to the
> > codebase, this would be useful. QOF spinout is required before cashutil
> > can be merged into the gnucash tree.
>
> I would like to see this happen on a branch if you're planning on doing
> it before the next release.
>
> What are those structural changes?

Lots. Cashutil definitely needs a careful merge into gnucash - it's not going 
to happen any time soon. 

The logic levels are the largest component. However, cashutil does depend on 
external QOF.

-- 

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20051016/d7e411d8/attachment.bin