[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Future of LedgerSMB: Ideas and RFC

I'm very happily using LSMB in its current version and state and will be
grateful with any improvement or future version.

Thanks for the great work!
It is a really useful engine, as 'the fat controller' would say :)

On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 13:53 -0700, Chris Travers wrote:
> Hi all;
> Many of you may be frustrated at the pace of development of LedgerSMB
> and the fact that 1.3 has not yet been released.  Development may
> appear to have slowed. Public discussions become less frequent...
> For the last few years, LedgerSMB has achieved significant growth.
> Some of that growth has come at an organizational cost and for that I
> apologize to the community.  Now I have to try to help put the
> organizational stuff back together.
> In reality, far from being quiet, LedgerSMB 1.3 has had a huge amount
> of commissioned work done on it, not only for the core system (where
> the customer/vendor management, reconciliation, and payment interfaces
> have been completely rewritten) but also in areas of addons for fixed
> asset handling, template transactions, so forth.  We have eliminated a
> lot of performance bottlenecks for larger databases, and provided a
> much higher level of security than previous versions.  This has been a
>  very ambitious project and we are much better off for it.
> I would like to propose a few specific directional approaches and get
> feedback from the community before proceeding.
> I think the major priorities at this point need to be:
> 1)  Getting 1.3 out the door.
> 2)  Focusing heavily on community building
> 3)  Trying to build partnerships with other open source business
> projects (perhaps GNU Med and others?)
> To this end I would like to tentatively suggest the following:
> The first is a regular beta release schedule for 1.3...  Maybe every
> other Tuesday?
> There are some committed fixes for 1.2 which have not made it into a
> release.  I would like to release this as soon as possible.  However,
> given the fact that bug reports have slowed, I think it is likely that
> it is not likely that 1.2 will see another release absent developing
> problems  like issues caused by new versions of Perl.
> I'd also like to encourage anyone who is interested in contributing to
> start looking heavily at 1.3.  This is a place where you can earn a
> name in the CONTRIBUTORS file, or possibly even commit privileges.
> But in addition I would like to see what the community thinks.  What
> do you think we need to do to pull things back together and bring the
> project to the next level?
> Best Wishes,
> Chris Travers
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know!
> Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its 
> next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran 
> developers boost performance applications - including clusters. 
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
> _______________________________________________
> Ledger-smb-users mailing list
> ..hidden..
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ledger-smb-users