[freeside-devel] a few comments...

[ivan]

On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 05:54:38PM -0400, toby cabot wrote:
> Folks,
> 
> Thanks for writing freeside and making it freely available!  It looks
> like a good start, and it's already better than some of the commercial
> ISP billing software.  I've only found one other Free (as in speech)
> billing package - ispd at ispd.eburg.com.  It's written in C which makes
> it not-so-attractive to me (but should make Brian Wolfe happy).
> 
> I'd like to pitch in here and there.  I've got a wishlist but I thought
> I'd cut my teeth on issues that other people have identifed first.
> 
> Quick thought: have you guys seen sql-ledger (www.sql-ledger.com)?

I hadn't until now.

> It's a double-entry accounting package which is very similar to
> freeside in some ways.  Both can use postgresql, both use perl/DBI as a
> programming language.  Both databases are pretty clean so it shouldn't
> be too hard to normalize them; if there's any interest I'll take a
> first cut at an analysis and report back here.

I'm *extrememly* interested.  Incidentally, I've been speaking to Gordon
from ISPD about doing some database table integration; this seems like it
would go together well with that effort as well, so I've Cc:'ed him here. 

WRT sql-ledger: The schema and functionality are excellent.  What it could
*really* use is an API interface to this functionality as well - the CGI
scripts are monolithic, containing both user-interface code and SQL
backend stuff.  I'd be thrilled if the CGI scripts could just be wrappers
around module code (called SQL::Ledger, for example) where contained all
the actual functionality.  This would make the task of integrating
sql-ledger with Freeside, or anything else, much simpler. 

> I think it might
> benefit both packages to be able to take advantage of the others'
> features.  Sql-ledger would
> get cyclical billing, and Freeside would get more robust financial
> accounting.  Everybody wins.
> 
> Regards,
> Toby Cabot
> 
> 

-- 
meow
_ivan