On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 07:49:30PM -0500, Matthew Vanecek was heard to remark: > > No, I understand it quite well. I may not have framed the question > clearly, though.
OK, I guess I'm just feeling protective & prickly a bit. I'll spare the rant about other developers who promised to 'improve' things and instead broke things that used to work, things they didn't understand. (like the fact that gnucash 1.2 did cap gains better than 1.8 does). So now, older and wiser, get prickly about anything that has the faintest wiff of backsliding. My apologies, please understand. > gncGUIDcache table was dropped, and it's references (apparently) removed > from Gnucash, I don't know what the table looks like and therefore Its still in CVS, somewhere ... > Derek suggested not worrying about it, as it's unlikely anyone has an > installation that old using the database backend. I'm inclined to Yes i agree. > agree, and have moved on in life. The other upgrades work (now), so all > is well, I reckon. They should have always worked, I know I tested them, so I find this statement vaguely alarming. That's what I mean about 'faintest wiff'; it may be a false alarm, but its an alarm anyways ... --linas -- pub 1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984 3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933 _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gnucash.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
