Re: Looking beyond 1.3: Kernalization and requirements proposals.

[Luke <..hidden..>]

On Sat, 6 Mar 2010, Chris Travers wrote:

> Correct.  AR/AP transactions would be what would be standard out of
> the box under this proposal.
[.]
> > Some sort of simplified service invoice would have to be included,
> > overrideable by a full invoice with the inventory package.
>
> AR/AP transaction screens would be comparable to what I am thinking
> though with usability improvements.

Really, the minimum to make them functional as invoices, is the right 
template, and a dropdown addition in the template selector for printing. 
That isn't much work at all.
Beyond that, real invoices come with the inventory module.

> I am also thinking it may be helpful to look at two different ways of
> distributing the software.
>
> One would be a "core" release which would be minimalist and clearly
> labelled as such.  The other would be a "bundle" which would include
> commonly used addons.

Since I'm harping on Drupal today (I sort of have to--it's become 50% of 
my business in the last 2 years), their "installation profile" idea seems 
to be what you're describing here.  It is of limited usefulness in the 
Drupal context I have thought, but makes perfect sense for LSMB.

The idea being: you can roll your own using modules/addons, or you can 
take somebody's best guess as to what your type of business needs, and 
start from that with a preconfigured package.

Luke