RFC: Move business-core objects (back) into engine, including their serialization

[Derek Atkins]

Hi,

Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> writes:

> On Saturday 27 March 2010, Christian Stimming wrote:
>> For this reason I propose to move all code from business-core/ into
>>  engine/, the code from business-core/xml/ into backend/xml, and from
>>  business-core/sql into backend/sql. This will get us back to the point
>>  where each single level of abstraction is also located in one single
>>  location in our source code.
>> 
>> I don't think moving this code "upstream" inside our tree might cause any
>> major problems, because any "downstream" dependencies will implicitly
>>  continue to be fulfilled before and after the move.

I'll respond to the original email in a bit.. It's a lot to take in and
I've got a lot of work and travel going on (trying to get my house ready
to put on the market).  So I appologize for taking a long time to respond.

>> Regards,
>> 
>> Christian
>> 
>> [1]
>> http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/2010-March/027718.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnucash-devel mailing list
>> gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
>> 
> I am all for merging the business core objects into the engine. IMO this will 
> make it easier to improve the integration of the business functions in the 
> rest of GnuCash. It will also avoid having to fix things in two places (like 
> the Japanese support in the register code, for example).

Note that merging in business-core will NOT affect the necessity of
business-ledger.  So this merge will NOT prevent you from fixing
Japanese support in multiple places.

> So, +1 as far as I'm concerned.
>
> Geert

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available