[CS-FSLUG] Church Management Software

[Fred A. Miller]

Ed Hurst wrote:
> EnzoAeneas wrote:
>> no not at all. We have control over the version of everything we use.
>> Besides, if we simply adapt pre-existing software for most
>> functionality, we are simply providing glue code.
>>
>> But you are not wrong at all. Just perspective different from mine.
>> We can go that direction to simplify initial implementation, and
>> maintain a separate codebase for other ideas.
>> Both could be maintained. In either case, we need to plan well and
>> keep all of our end users in mind.
>> I appreciate that you have been doing that through my techno ranting :-)
> 
> Two parallel models. If we can manage it, I rather like that idea. There
> is something to be said for having a smaller and simple glue package
> based on OO, as long as we remind users it has limits. At the same time,
> we can produce a heavier project for larger churches. Perhaps the coup
> de grace would be some means to migrate up to the latter if the
> particular organization wishes.
> 
> That way we can help the computer clueless, but offer something more
> involved for organizations willing to commit to learning the heavier
> system. We can't deny a large scale operation simply requires more
> specialization in staff. I don't see how that makes it any worse than
> what exists in commercial CM software, and certainly better that we
> remove the cost of the software itself. The only people we can't appeal
> to are those who insist on the full corporate support model.
> 
> In the process, we become somewhat expert in the field itself, and offer
> strong advice to those who can't make up their minds, or whose needs
> simply fall outside the immediate scope of what we build. All of us who
> take a hand in this gain expertise and improve our serve in the many
> unforeseen places the Lord takes us.

WELL said, Ed!!

Fred

-- 
Linux is an old Latin word meaning, "I don't have
to support your Windows anymore."