On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 10:54:10PM +0100, Andreas Rottmann was heard to remark: > My question now is: what plans do the GnuCash developers have > regarding the Guile bindings? I think it the there are two
I can't comment on most of your email, because I almost certainly won't be doing the port myself; however, two small comments: -- please increment the version number correctly when making incompatible changes. g-wrap 1.3.4 is fundametnally incompatible with 1.3.1 but one would never have guessed by looking at the version number. This made debugging a lot harder than it should have been. -- I'm concerned about making gnucash depend on *two* packages instead of one, which is what it sounds like you are describing. The concern is that Guile-GObject might be poorly maintained or might go out with wacky version numbers and bugs, leaving us once again scratching our heads as to why a minor upgrade broke something somewhere for thousands of users. One of the saddest, most annoying aspects of having used scheme/guile in general is how minor version changes in these packages managed to induce breakage in gnucash. --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
