Public Suport for LedgerSMB (was: Re: Call for testing experimental patch)

[Alejandro Imass <..hidden..>]

Chris,

I would like to thank you publicly for giving this software the
direction of community-oriented development. Many people underestimate
the effort involved in a fork, in the same way that many people
underestimate many things in Free Software and Open Source, and _very
few_ people actually understand the business and economics of this model
in general. 

Believe it or not, I was once kicked out the SL list for offering to
publish several cool hacks, reports, etc. and invited others to do the
same. We had the idea of a "Sql-Ledger Goodies" site where everyone
could publish their hacks for others to use, and to invite the author to
incorporate these hacks into the main code. Several of us were banned
from the list because of this, and my name was removed from the
contributor's list forever, even though I submitted the beginnings of HR
account configuration, a generic COA for Venezuela, and a few bug
reports thereafter. I later re-subscribed but on a "moderated"
condition, which of course killed my motivation so I just lurked on the
list for several years. 

Anyway, I just wanted to drop these few lines of gratitude for the great
effort that _I know_ that you and your team are doing to get this new
project going and to concretely offer the following:

0) I publicly back this fork and will contact every single person and
list that I have recommended Sql-Ledger to switch to LedgerSMB. Of
course, I also de-subscribed from SL following the doctor's advise ;-]

1) I will migrate my humble installed base to LedgerSMB and do my best
to participate in any discussions where I can help. Once I migrate my
clients to LedgerSMB I will package a few things that I have built for
SL and donate them to LedgerSMB.

2) P2EE will fully back this initiative and will publish our support for
your project on our small mailing list. P2EE, though me, will make sure
that anything that we build will inter-operate and hopefully not overlap
with the functionality of Ledger SMB. As you know, we stand on the
non-monolithic idea, so everything that we eventually build will
inter-operate anyway, the difference is, that we simply would not even
have thought of talking to ds about this, and wanted to stay very much
away from SL and ds. Because of this, we would be more than willing and
happy to share some concrete ideas we have been discussing such as the
POE-based application structure and Catalyst/AJAX/XUL front-end
approach.

3) I will publicly announce my support of LedgerSMB to the SOLVE ERP
project mailing list, and explain why we support LedgerSMB instead of
SL.

I know these are humble offerings but with them, I just wanted to
morally back this fork and throw in my $0.02. Hopefully in the future, I
will be able to contribute a lot more to the project.

Best regards,
Alejandro Imass
Professor, Instituto Superior de Estudios e Investigaciones Tecnológicas
- ISEIT. Founding member of Software Libre Venezuela - SOLVE 


On Wed, 2006-09-20 at 08:23 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> On second thought, there is no consistant naming in the current db so
> it doesn;t matter.  I will go ahead and rename it.
> 
> On 9/20/06, Chris Travers <..hidden..> wrote:
> > I suppose if people would rather have it called "transactions" I can
> > rename it transactions.