Re: What about release plans for 2.2.0?
On 6/15/07, Beth Leonard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 12:21:25PM +0200, Christian Stimming wrote: What do we do with our release plans for a 2.2.0 release? We planned that release for the upcoming weekend [1], but currently the development has slowed significantly. Even more importantly, the PR Planning [2] has made almost zero progress, but we would need at least a week of work there before we have enough PR material for the Windows release. I'll try to get working on the PR stuff a bit. These past few weeks have been a bit hectic for me. [...] More thoughts? Decisions? I'm unsure, really. I'd prefer to have 2.2.0 by now, but I have to admit I won't have much time dealing with Windows bugs after that. If there is a majority to have 2.2.0 by now, I'd happily deal with the PR work; however, if we prefer to delay it, then I'd also happily delay the PR work as well. I think that delaying this release is the worse option. We are already getting a lot of interest in the dev releases (see below) - If we wait too much longer I think the 2.1.x series will start to be used as a stable version by the windows community, regardless. I think we should take the few weeks to get 2.2.0 ready and released. As you mention, it has been a while since the last stable release. Do we currently have any idea how many people are using the Windows version? We have a reasonably stable download rate of about 200 downloads a day, so it's definitely getting some interest. http://sourceforge.net/project/stats/detail.php?group_id=192ugn=gnucashtype=prdownloadmode=60daypackage_id=5582release_id=513015file_id=1191940 As for dedicated users, I can't say. Have all of the major use-cases been exercised by someone who knows what they're doing? If not, no matter when you release it, I'd recommend advertising the release candidate Windows version to the current user base and asking people who know how GnuCash is supposed to work to try it under windows. Do this before having a major PR campaign to the news sources for the actual stable release. With luck, the bug reports that come in from the release candidate(s) from the current user base will be helpful and reproducible, as opposed to the type of bug reports one can imagine getting from the typical windows user. When those have been dealt with, then consider when to release 2.2.0. I know that announcements have been made to the user list, but they haven't been release candidates yet. When dealing with financial data, many people don't like to make the switch until they're fairly certain it's stable. I like this idea - Could we indicate that 2.1.4 is intended to be a release candidate? If that doesn't draw in more testers, I don't know what will. Nathan ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: What about release plans for 2.2.0?
Am Samstag, 16. Juni 2007 09:07 schrieb Nathan Buchanan: What do we do with our release plans for a 2.2.0 release? We planned that release for the upcoming weekend [1], but currently the development has slowed significantly. Even more importantly, the PR Planning [2] has made almost zero progress, but we would need at least a week of work there before we have enough PR material for the Windows release. I'll try to get working on the PR stuff a bit. These past few weeks have been a bit hectic for me. Ok. Same for me. I'll try to add more material as well (also in German). I think that delaying this release is the worse option. We are already getting a lot of interest in the dev releases (see below) - If we wait too much longer I think the 2.1.x series will start to be used as a stable version by the windows community, regardless. I think we should take the few weeks to get 2.2.0 ready and released. As you mention, it has been a while since the last stable release. That's what I think as well. So let's go for it. I'd recommend advertising the release candidate Windows version to the current user base and asking people who know how GnuCash is supposed to work to try it under windows. Do this before having a major PR campaign to the news sources for the actual stable release. I like this idea - Could we indicate that 2.1.4 is intended to be a release candidate? If that doesn't draw in more testers, I don't know what will. Yes, I think that's reasonable. IMHO the current SVN status is ready to be announced as release candidate. So let's release 2.1.4 this weekend and call it our release candidate 1. Christian ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.1.4 Released
*DATA FILE NOTICE* If you are using Scheduled Transactions, the data file saved by GnuCash 2.1.2 and higher is *NOT* backward-compatible with GnuCash 2.0 anymore. Please make a safe backup of your 2.0 data before upgrading to 2.1.2. This kind of announcement is extremely problematic from a redistributor/packager perspective (mine). But maybe it's just the announcement that's problematic and not the actual change it points to. I could interpret this in two ways: If you have an old data file, the new Gnucash will be unable to read it, and worse, might destroy it. This is a disaster, if true. If you save a data file with the new Gnucash, then an old Gnucash will be unable to read it. If this is true, then it means that users who start using the new Gnucash will have committed to the new one, essentially, for that file, and backups are advised in case going back to the old Gnucash is needed. I would describe both of these by saying that it is not backward compatible. Can you clarify which it is? Thomas signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Re: GnuCash 2.1.4 Released
On Sat, Jun 16, 2007 at 02:06:53PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: *DATA FILE NOTICE* If you are using Scheduled Transactions, the data file saved by GnuCash 2.1.2 and higher is *NOT* backward-compatible with GnuCash 2.0 anymore. Please make a safe backup of your 2.0 data before upgrading to 2.1.2. This kind of announcement is extremely problematic from a redistributor/packager perspective (mine). But maybe it's just the announcement that's problematic and not the actual change it points to. I could interpret this in two ways: If you have an old data file, the new Gnucash will be unable to read it, and worse, might destroy it. This is a disaster, if true. If you save a data file with the new Gnucash, then an old Gnucash will be unable to read it. If this is true, then it means that users who start using the new Gnucash will have committed to the new one, essentially, for that file, and backups are advised in case going back to the old Gnucash is needed. I would describe both of these by saying that it is not backward compatible. Can you clarify which it is? It's the second of those two interpretations. And it's only a problem for people using scheduled transactions. --Beth Beth Leonard http://www.LeonardFamilyVideos.com ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Re: GnuCash 2.1.4 Released
It's the second of those two interpretations. And it's only a problem for people using scheduled transactions. Ok, then next question. What exactly happens if a user tries to load a new-format file into an old gnucash? Thomas signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.1.4 Released
Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's the second of those two interpretations. And it's only a problem for people using scheduled transactions. Ok, then next question. What exactly happens if a user tries to load a new-format file into an old gnucash? It will generically complain that the file is unreadable; I forget the exact error message text. -- ...jsled http://asynchronous.org/ - a=jsled; b=asynchronous.org; echo [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpIu9YGNjgLg.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
QIF importer
The plan for qif importer is as follows and suggestions/guidance is welcome! The following flow(taken from the qif documentation) has to be followed for the QIF importer. It is the same(almost) in respect to what happens presently except the way it will be implemented. Action corresponding function a. Create the contextqif_context_create(already exists in /src/import-export/qif) b. Add/Remove files to be imported b1. Add file qif_file_new(already exists in /src/import-export/qif) b2 Remove file qif_file_remove(already exists in /src/import-export/qif) b2. Parse the added file qif_file_parse(already exists in /src/import-export/qif) c. merge internally to be made(is there a generic one that could be used as is desirable?) d. map qif accounts to gnucash accounts something exists in /src/import-export but has to be tested to see if it works e. map qif categories to gnucash accounts something exists in /src/import-export but has to be tested to see if it works f. map qif securities to gnucash commodities something exists in /src/import-export but has to be tested to see if it works g. duplicate detection with existing gnucash txns to be made(is there a generic one that could be used as is desirable?) h. transaction matcher (map one-sided txns using Payee/Memo info) something exists in /src/import-export but has to be tested to see if it works The way I'll proceed is that I'll strip the gnucash code of the qif backend(help on how to do this gracefully is required). The idea is to substitute the required functions by dummy functions that do nothing(except continuing the flow of import). Then, one by one, as per the flow of qif-import, I'll replace the dummy functions by the completed one and test it. The idea is to incrementally integrate, modify, test and develop the importer. I understand that the development is behind what I had initially planned but I certainly hope to cover up soon. Thanks. -Chintan ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.1.4 Released
On Sat, 2007-06-16 at 20:05 -0400, Josh Sled wrote: Thomas Bushnell BSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's the second of those two interpretations. And it's only a problem for people using scheduled transactions. Ok, then next question. What exactly happens if a user tries to load a new-format file into an old gnucash? It will generically complain that the file is unreadable; I forget the exact error message text. Ah, good. Thanks for indulging me. This all sounds like it's exactly the best one can expect, given the necessity of changing the format in the first place. Thomas signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
