Re: future of LedgerSMB

[Jeff Kowalczyk <..hidden..>]

--- "Joshua D. Drake" <..hidden..> wrote:
> Actually (python) has been discussed. At least two of the core members are
> pro python. Python also gives us a better cross platform capability.

That's interesting to hear. For a long while prior to the LedgerSMB fork, I had
considered working with sql-ledger (i.e. committing to deploying it for
clients) and doing a 1:1 port to python CGI of any SL module I needed to
understand thoroughly, customize, or write tests for, and then run the
module(s) overlaid on the original SL release.

I'm not sure it's actually worth all the effort, but with enough interested
contributors it might make for a good starting point for some of the
refactoring and test retrofitting LedgerSMB has planned. I suppose that could
happen anytime along the development process, on a branch. I'd like to pitch
in, to the extent that I can understand the original perl code.

> That being said, I also don't see any problem with using Perl. The
> problem with perl is not maintainability, it is bad developers. You
> *can* write perfectly maintainable perl code if you choose too.

Right, perl is almost synonymous with CGI applications. If a redesign with
modern web framework and ORM were desired, there are many good options with
Python, especially now.

> In the end, I would expect that it is all irrelevant because we will
> provide an API that allows you to write an interface in anything you want.

Does WSGI have any implementation/traction in the Perl world?
http://search.cpan.org/search?query=WSGI&mode=all returns no results

JSON, YAML and XML-RPC data transfer and automation interfaces as an
alternative to URL query strings would probably open up a lot of integration possibilities.


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
TV dinner still cooling? 
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/