Re: soliciting opinions about potential new cron/at features.
Mike Merten <ironfoot@popaccount.com> writes:
> Pardon me for butting in here...
No problem. I wouldn't have asked in the first place if I didn't want
feedback :>
> I've been following this thread for a while now, and I may be dense,
> but I can't see the logic of using cron, or at, or any other system
> scheduling event to handle automatic transactions in a financial
> program. GnuCash (or for that matter, cbb or any of the others)
> should always consider its data files 'sacred', and never rely on
> other programs (over which it has absolutely no control) to modify
> them in any way. IMHO, this type of application is critical enough
> to justify the extra code required to provide GnuCash with its own
> scheduling capabilities.
Well, I can see your point to an extent, but I look at cron and at as
well-tested, critical system services which are more likely to work as
advertised and be bug-free than something new written just for
GnuCash. Now GnuCash will still have to have internal scheduling code
of its own to decide when it needs to be run next, but I was hoping to
use something like at (I think cron may well be out for the reason(s)
brought up in Roderick's message).
Now it may well be that in the end we have to write gnucashd and
require it to be installed, but if possible, I'd prefer to rely on a
common, well-tested mechanism like at. (I tend to look at this as
being similar to deciding between adding a potentially useful feature
to grep and trying to hack up your own version with the feature you
want).
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
Reply to: