Re: Proposal for 1.5: Move LedgerSMB to Dancer

Hi Louis,

On Sun, 10 Aug 2014, Chris Travers wrote:

Hi all; There has been some discussion in the past I have had with folks about moving LedgerSMB to Catalyst. The concern I have is that as Catalyst is a fairly large framework it isn't clear how much we'd be using very light aspects of the framework and how much dependency overhead we'd have.

I use Catalyst for some things, and it seems to me to be quite heavy. Dancer/Dancer2 I am not familiar with, but as far as LedgerSMB is concerned I'll always be more of a user than a developer.

Regardless, your feedback is very much appreciated!

I would like to see LedgerSMB move into a framework. I see that as part of the overall attitude that LedgerSMB is part of a larger ecosystem rather than one man's labor.

This is an interesting point you're making here, however, there are some assumptions assumptions behind it that - if you have some time to do so - I would really love to see stated. (This is not an attack, it's really that I may be missing some of the finer points that are behind your point.)

What do you think we have to gain by moving to a framework? Usually, frameworks restrict developers by requiring specific authentication schemes. Or by requiring specific database backends. Or by having a specific templating engine or ORM mapper. Since none of that is currently in place for LedgerSMB (by which I mean none of it is compliant with any of the web frameworks that I know of and hence development effort is required to get there), what do you imagine to be gained by the project (both short term and long term gains would be interesting, especially since there's an inherent short term cost in my view of things).

Talking to Chris earlier today, he told me he expected long term benefits on at least these items (I hope you concur and maybe think of more):

1. Creation of an API (due to the availability of a resource->entrypoint mapper and a serializers)

2. Websockets

Bye,

Erik.

http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.

Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.