[CS-FSLUG] Church Management Software

[Josiah Ritchie]

On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:52 PM, Micah Yoder <yoderm at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Robert Wohlfarth <rbwohlfarth at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  >  A lot of churches - especially the ones looking for free (cost)
>  >  software - have modest amounts of active data. I'm not sure if
>  >  performance is that much of a problem.
>  >
>  >  A database adds complexity. It must be managed, supported, etc... The
>  >  cost, in this case, isn't money. Volunteers face a steeper learning
>  >  curve.
>
>  Have you really used a database? Not to sound sarcastic but with those
>  arguments it doesn't sound like you really understand what they're all
>  about.  Storing structured relational data in text files just isn't a
>  good idea.  I don't even believe it would be easier in any way.  Code
>  to parse and re-write the files would certainly be more than the
>  couple lines it takes to do an SQL query.

I think you guys have 2 differing perspectives. Roberts comments are
accurate from the perspective of the user/system administrator. Adding
a database layer means supporting the database program and learning
enough about it for it to work. Using a system of flat files would be
almost invisible to the user and perhaps more to their expectation
from using Microsoft Word. Databases are strange beasts to the
majority of the population.

>From the programmers perspective, a database is a huge asset allowing
significant efficiency and power in handling data. Someone else has
solved that problem, all we have to do is depend on them.

The question at hand is perhaps, "Will forcing the user to depend on a
database they won't understand create a barrier to adoption for our
targeted user base?" If our goal is service, then we are not likely to
accomplish that by doing what is easy for us, but rather do what is
easy for those who are to be served.

JSR/

-- 
Our Mission
Technology and Hospitality for God's Workmen
http://missions.ritchietribe.net