[ic] SQL-Ledger + Interchange: The straight dope.
jeme at rkdpp.com
Wed May 26 19:35:46 EDT 2004
On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 11:28, Tony Fraser wrote:
> Actually, they don't end up sharing the same table. If I recall
> correctly IC adds "parts" (or is it services?) to SQL-Ledger's parts
> table as it requires them if I remember correctly.
Well, that'd be a start.
> I have never set it up in production but I had it setup in a devel.
> environment at one time. I was going to work on updating the code. The
> current code interacts with the tables directly and there was a DB
> schema change in SQL-Ledger
Gah! Seems like it'd be smarter to write the stuff using the SQL-Ledger
API (though not having looked at the API it could be infinitely more
Since IC table schema seems to be totally up to the implementer (with a
few expected table names and column names), sharing data directly seems
straightforward. And IC could have a means for using the API to enter
orders and print pick slips and all that fancy stuff.
I'm probably way ahead of myself.
> Sorry I can't give you any pointers on setting it up right now. My devel
> machine is out of commission for a while (hardware failure) and it's
> been too long since I looked at IC -> SQL-Ledger.
I appreciate the information that you did give.
So am I to take it that nobody here is doing an integrated IC/SQL-Ledger
Is this just because SQL-Ledger is such a pain to modify?
More information about the interchange-users