Re: Is LSMB really suitable for the public?

[Phil Rhoades <..hidden..>]

David,

While I am convinced that the motivation behind the move from SL to LS
is a good idea . . see inline comments:


On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 13:17 +1000, David Tangye wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I am concerned that there have been a lot of problems with LSMB lately
> that have required quite a degree of software expertise to fix. In fact
> it is becoming apparent to me that those with little software expertise
> are struggling to get the app up and running, whether a fresh install or
> migration from SL.


I am in the IT business and after quite a few hours I have yet to get a
migration from SL to LS working (FC6).


> After all the goodwill and effort being made here, I
> find this as disappointing as I am sure many others do. While I spent 20
> years in IT, and therefore can understand the fixes etc, and can hack
> sql if needed:
>  1. I do not want to do this. I want the install to do everything right,
> the first time.


Me too - I will hack if have too but I would prefer to be working on
other things at the moment . .


>  2. 95% of computer users will not have a clue what the heck you are
> talking about and will not have a hope of installing/migrating.
> Furthermore most do not have the time nor inclination to become
> software-proficient just to get LSMB up. SQL, postgres mumbojumbo,
> hotfixes, cpan, svn, hack this tex here, that perl there ... and on and
> on and on. Forget it, they will stay with Windows and Quickbooks, MYOB
> etc etc.


There does not appear to be a complete, debugged document that results
in a successful migration.


> Without prattling on about this any further, can I just ask/suggest that
> the developers:
>  1. Stop doing functionality extensions/improvements
>  2. Get the basics right.


Hear, hear.


>  3. Set up and adhere to a better more comprehensive system test
> strategy, and stop releasing any further stuff in future until it is
> properly tested.


Yep.


> I have held off migration from SL, because this trend of broken releases
> is concerning me, and I am seeing no evidence of any attempt to control
> releases properly. In fact I am seeing too much hackering here. This is
> not the way to convince many people to jump into the software, because
> there appears to be too much risk that it will keep breaking in future
> releases, and I never back horses that keep breaking down.


I have basically decided to wait for v1.3 but will that make it even
more difficult to upgrade from SL v2.6.15?


> It seems that the developers here suffer the same problem I have seen in
> many software efforts: techos lost in their own world, unable to
> understand that their end user is NOT as cluey as them in software
> matters. Half the time you might as well be speaking Martian.


It seems that the catalyst for the fork had good reasons but the
migration should not be this hard . .


> If the purpose of this project is to build and accounting or ERP system
> for I.T. folks, say so. Actually I raised the point months ago about
> defining your target market/user base, and no-one really had much to say
> about that. I therefore surmise that the target market is not clearly
> defined, or else is implicitly 'us developers on behalf of our specific
> customers, whom we set up anyway'.


Hmmm . . I really hope that is not the case . .

Good post!

Phil.
-- 
Philip Rhoades

Pricom Pty Limited  (ACN 003 252 275  ABN 91 003 252 275)
GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW      2001
Australia
Fax:     +61:(0)2-8221-9599
E-mail:  ..hidden..