Re: Transaction reversal - I think

[Luke <..hidden..>]

On Wed, 21 May 2008, Joshua D. Drake wrote:

> Luke wrote:
> > On Thu, 22 May 2008, Terry Porter wrote:
> 
> > I would really enjoy seeing a move in LedgerSMB to switch to a 
> > client-server arch.  I think that is the real breakout step, enabling it 
> > to tangle with the other apps we've been talking about, and allowing the 
> > construction of more friendly interfaces.
> 
> That is one the points of 1.3 and 1.4. It is why we are pushing all data 
> logic into the database with stored procs. It auto creates the api to 
> call, all you need is your protocol, whether ReST, CGI or direct libpq.

I kind of thought that might be some of the reasoning, just never heard 
anyone come right out and say it.  Maybe more like I was hoping that was 
some of the reasoning.

Since you're reading this thread: is anyone monitoring bug reports posted 
for 1.2?  There are many still open on sourceforge, which make LSMB look 
bad imho, especially since some of them have been solved, and some are 
really large problems.

Regards,

Luke