Re: Is LSMB really suitable for the public?

[..hidden..]

At the risk of revisiting a thread that is in many ways too long; I would 
like to say that as a user of SL and of LS (and indeed I am running SL 
2.6.19 and LSMB 1.2.3 in parallel, transaction by transaction) that 
NEITHER is especially "easy" to install. I would also point out that each 
is easier to install than the PeopleSoft stuff my employer uses. I would 
also point out that both are more transparent than QuickBooks which was 
pretty easy (and mostly useless) for me.

If an SMB is going it alone without an IT person or Consultant, then 
neither SL or LS is appropriate. In reality the question isn't readiness 
for the public, but for end user installation.

I like the direction that LS is taking: it has more than 1 core developer; 
it has an active community forming; it is more open to contributions and 
to 3rd party integration.

I am ok with keeping the core team's feet to the fire with regard to 
issues of importance to me and/or the community, but I am not expecting 
them to fix all of SL's faults in code and community immediately. If you 
aren't ready for LSMB try back in a year... i bet we'll all be amazed.

lostinfog

P.S. Go Core Team Go, and thanks!