Re: libgda .... Re: GnuCash page on GO site

[Eneko Lacunza <listas enlar net>]

Hi,

El sáb, 06-03-2004 a las 21:51, Charles Goodwin escribió:
> On Sat, 2004-03-06 at 17:07, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > But I thought the goal of libgda was to provide a set of high-level
> > abstractions to multiple data sources, including sql and xml and ldap,
> > which would imply that libgda is comparable to other high-level
> > abstraction libraries.  But maybe that is libmergeant.
> That is the goal of libgda.  But you're comparing this to the goal of
> QOF which is to provide data-aware widgets, which libgda does not.  This
> is our frustration; you don't understand libgda because you're not
> prepared to, you're only looking at your own situation subjectively
> rather than stepping back and being objective about your requirements.
[...]

	Please, do not get angry. I can see and feel good-will from everyone
involved in this convergence. I think everyone should try to make clean
explanations and avoid the "who's wrong" game.

	For example I don't think pointing out GnuCash is a "failure" because
it doesn't have a released gtk2 interface does any good. We all know
that GnuCash is late with that task, but I think that developers are
doing their best and past decisions have been quite good for users
(users want features, and for "most" of them a tech/platform change is
not so important; they want help with their accounting). Instead of
saying "it's a failure" just suggest how you think we could have a gtk2
interface ASAP; this would be more positive, wouldn't it? :)

Regards