Are There Plans For A GUI Overhaul?

[Thomas Baumgart]

Hi,

On Thursday 20 October 2016 00:31:29 Lincoln A Baxter wrote:

> IMO, you are asking the right (hard) questions... I'm interested in
> seeing the response to the https://kmymoney.org/ question.  Is this a
> fork, or not?

I can certainly answer that: No it is not a fork, even though some concepts 
are similar/inspired by GnuCash and it uses the same backends like AqBanking 
and libOFX provided as separate libraries.

Regards

Thomas


> On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 09:56 +0100, John Ralls wrote:
> > > On Oct 18, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Paul Phillips <paul at patchpitch.com>
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > >
> > > Hi John,
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > Indeed it is a shame, and I regret causing the discord and
> > 
> > suspicion.  Please accept my apologies.
> > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > Thanks for your insight and the link to the SFC.  I shall get in
> > 
> > touch with them.
> > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > The only other way of engaging with the GnuCash project without the
> > 
> > need of either a contract or management oversight is to create a
> > fork.  It would therefore obviously be completely optional whether
> > the dev team adopted any of the changes.  But if the fork development
> > matched the Gnucash roadmap and project guidelines, the chances of
> > merger would presumably increase.
> > 
> > > 
> > >
> > > However the key to enabling this to succeed is the user base, and
> > 
> > as a fork, the user base starts from scratch.
> > 
> > > 
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > There are forks and then there are Github forks. The latter is one
> > usual way for "outside" developers and documentors to contribute,
> > submitting their work through a Github pull request (which is a bit
> > different and much easier to use than the traditional git email pull
> > request used by the Linux project.
> > 
> > The other kind of fork is what happened with Open Office a few years
> > ago: Unhappy with the way Oracle was managing the product, a large
> > chunk of the development team took the code base and created a new
> > product, Libre Office. I think that's what would have to happen with
> > a "commercialized" GnuCash: The "commercial" team would have to
> > create a new product to work on to guarantee that the paid-for work
> > actually gets released in a product. 
> > 
> > I've put "commercial" in scare-quotes because the new product would
> > still be limited by the provisions of the GPL and the GnuCash project
> > would be able to merge any changes that they liked into the Free
> > version. Both because of that and the limitations of the GPL the
> > "commercial" entity would have to find some other way of monetizing
> > the product; that's normally done on open source projects by selling
> > support. IMO that's a hard nut to crack: Developers, documentors, and
> > managers are expensive and the "commercial" entity would need a
> > pretty hefty cash-flow; a reasonable-sized team might run as much as
> > $1M/year once overhead is included.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > John Ralls
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnucash-devel mailing list
> > gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-devel mailing list
> gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
-- 

Regards

Thomas Baumgart

GPG-FP: E55E D592 F45F 116B 8429   4F99 9C59 DB40 B75D D3BA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.
(Rich Kulawiec)
-------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 225 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20161020/2be4a618/attachment.sig>