Bill Gribble wrote:
>
> Well, now that the 1.6 release has happened, it's time to start
> looking forward to the 1.7 series :) This is a proposal that I have
> been wanting to get off my chest for a while.
>
> ...
>
> 2. New functionality can be added as modules that require only the
> installation of a new module rather than an upgrade of the whole
> system. Module versioning and version dependencies that track module
> APIs will prevent skew.
>
> ...
>
> What do you guys think? Specific thoughts/desires about how it should
> be done?
It sounds like an idea whose time has come. A couple questions:
- I'm a little nervous about version skew, having recently worked on a
project in RL that was transitioning from a monolithic product into
separate modules with mixed success. I think a lot will depend on how
general the module interfaces can be - the less is known about other
modules, the easier to deal with skew if it occurs.
- is the "function table" located in the scheme layer or the C layer?
Would a pure-scheme module (say, something that just generates reports
at a terminal) still need a C lib to hook up to the function table?
- Will each module provide its own g-wrappers, I assume? Maybe there
needs to be a mechanism or a policy to avoid collisions in that
namespace.
--
Kevin Finn
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gnumatic.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
