[GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Wirawan Purwanto]

Hi,

I wonder if anyone has a pointer on the changes in Gnucash XML format
that can cause incompatibility across program versions. I have a
scenario where one OS uses Gnucash 2.6.x series whereas the other uses
3.5. I am concerned when transporting data file back and forth, if
there is corruption due to incompatible file format.

In my recent trial to migrate files back and forth between 2.6 and
3.5, I noted that data seems to be intact. But in the 2.6 series, the
"cmdty:space" field has the value of "ISO4217" whereas in 3.5 it was
"CURRENCY". But I noted that a very old GNUCash version (2.4.10)
failed to read the dates correctly from the file that was saved by
3.5. All dates became "1969-12-31" when read in the 2.4 program.
Because of this I am not quite sure what is safe to do or not safe.
Would be nice if there is a prominent / easy-to-find web page which
tells end-user like me regarding file version incompatibility.

-- 
Wirawan Purwanto

~ https://bfa.org ~
"Get your own copy of a free study Bible"
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Cousens]

Wirawan,

I don't think anyone has mapped out the changes in data file structures.
That information will be contained in the Release Notes for each version.
The 2.6 to 3 transition involved some changes in the locations that user
configuration files are located in on the various systems which are detailed
in the wiki at https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Configuration_Locations but I
am not sure about any data file changes. I don't remember there being any. 
I think the transition was from ~2.6.21 as the last stable version of the
2.6 series to V3.1 and I have seen recommendations to upgrade to at least
2.6.19 before moving to the V3 series for minimum disruption. AFAIK once the
data has been migrated to V3 it is not usually possible to go back to the
v2.6 series but this may simply be the effect of the configuration file
locations and not necessarily any changes in the XML file itself. 

If possible it would be better to go to the same V3 version on both systems
at the same time. I access my datafiles which are located in a Dropbox from
both a Linux and Windows systems but upgrade both to the most recent version
at the same time. recent changes in Dropbox have affected the ability to do
this though.

David Cousens



-
David Cousens
--
Sent from: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GnuCash-User-f1415819.html
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Wirawan Purwanto]

Hi David, thanks for clarification. For every major release (either
2.x or 3.x series), is there a guarantee for file format
compatibility?

Wirawan

On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 11:21 PM David Carlson
 wrote:
>
> According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is 
> expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is 
> release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.  
> When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes that 
> may be at least partially mentioned in other threads here.  They do not 
> specify if there are any changes in the database variations, but there 
> probably are.
>
> David Carlson
>
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 9:08 PM Wirawan Purwanto  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wonder if anyone has a pointer on the changes in Gnucash XML format
>> that can cause incompatibility across program versions. I have a
>> scenario where one OS uses Gnucash 2.6.x series whereas the other uses
>> 3.5. I am concerned when transporting data file back and forth, if
>> there is corruption due to incompatible file format.
>>
>> In my recent trial to migrate files back and forth between 2.6 and
>> 3.5, I noted that data seems to be intact. But in the 2.6 series, the
>> "cmdty:space" field has the value of "ISO4217" whereas in 3.5 it was
>> "CURRENCY". But I noted that a very old GNUCash version (2.4.10)
>> failed to read the dates correctly from the file that was saved by
>> 3.5. All dates became "1969-12-31" when read in the 2.4 program.
>> Because of this I am not quite sure what is safe to do or not safe.
>> Would be nice if there is a prominent / easy-to-find web page which
>> tells end-user like me regarding file version incompatibility.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Colin Law]

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 15:21, Wirawan Purwanto  wrote:
>
> Hi David, thanks for clarification. For every major release (either
> 2.x or 3.x series), is there a guarantee for file format
> compatibility?

Upwards, yes I believe so.  Any migration necessary would be handled
by gnucash itself.  There is no guarantee that a 3.x file will work in
2.x though in practice it may be ok.

Colin

>
> Wirawan
>
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 11:21 PM David Carlson
>  wrote:
> >
> > According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is 
> > expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is 
> > release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.  
> > When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes that 
> > may be at least partially mentioned in other threads here.  They do not 
> > specify if there are any changes in the database variations, but there 
> > probably are.
> >
> > David Carlson
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 9:08 PM Wirawan Purwanto  wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I wonder if anyone has a pointer on the changes in Gnucash XML format
> >> that can cause incompatibility across program versions. I have a
> >> scenario where one OS uses Gnucash 2.6.x series whereas the other uses
> >> 3.5. I am concerned when transporting data file back and forth, if
> >> there is corruption due to incompatible file format.
> >>
> >> In my recent trial to migrate files back and forth between 2.6 and
> >> 3.5, I noted that data seems to be intact. But in the 2.6 series, the
> >> "cmdty:space" field has the value of "ISO4217" whereas in 3.5 it was
> >> "CURRENCY". But I noted that a very old GNUCash version (2.4.10)
> >> failed to read the dates correctly from the file that was saved by
> >> 3.5. All dates became "1969-12-31" when read in the 2.4 program.
> >> Because of this I am not quite sure what is safe to do or not safe.
> >> Would be nice if there is a prominent / easy-to-find web page which
> >> tells end-user like me regarding file version incompatibility.
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is
release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.
When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes that
may be at least partially mentioned in other threads here.  They do not
specify if there are any changes in the database variations, but there
probably are.

David Carlson

On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 9:08 PM Wirawan Purwanto  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I wonder if anyone has a pointer on the changes in Gnucash XML format
> that can cause incompatibility across program versions. I have a
> scenario where one OS uses Gnucash 2.6.x series whereas the other uses
> 3.5. I am concerned when transporting data file back and forth, if
> there is corruption due to incompatible file format.
>
> In my recent trial to migrate files back and forth between 2.6 and
> 3.5, I noted that data seems to be intact. But in the 2.6 series, the
> "cmdty:space" field has the value of "ISO4217" whereas in 3.5 it was
> "CURRENCY". But I noted that a very old GNUCash version (2.4.10)
> failed to read the dates correctly from the file that was saved by
> 3.5. All dates became "1969-12-31" when read in the 2.4 program.
> Because of this I am not quite sure what is safe to do or not safe.
> Would be nice if there is a prominent / easy-to-find web page which
> tells end-user like me regarding file version incompatibility.
>
> --
> Wirawan Purwanto
>
> ~ https://bfa.org ~
> "Get your own copy of a free study Bible"
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>


-- 
David Carlson
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Adrien Monteleone]

If I recall correctly, dates are represented differently at some point in the 
3.x series, but this might only be for SQL.

Regards,
Adrien

> On Feb 9, 2020 w7d40, at 10:21 PM, David Carlson 
>  wrote:
> 
> According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
> expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is
> release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.
> When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes that
> may be at least partially mentioned in other threads here.  They do not
> specify if there are any changes in the database variations, but there
> probably are.
> 
> David Carlson

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

Isn't there also a change to the transaction matching scheme ?  I thought
that was the main reason that only 2.6.21 could read both forms.

David Carlson


On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 11:57 AM Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:

> If I recall correctly, dates are represented differently at some point in
> the 3.x series, but this might only be for SQL.
>
> Regards,
> Adrien
>
> > On Feb 9, 2020 w7d40, at 10:21 PM, David Carlson <
> david.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
> > expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is
> > release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.
> > When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes
> that
> > may be at least partially mentioned in other threads here.  They do not
> > specify if there are any changes in the database variations, but there
> > probably are.
> >
> > David Carlson
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

I omitted the word import as in transaction import matching scheme.

David Carlson

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 2:10 PM David Carlson 
wrote:

> Isn't there also a change to the transaction matching scheme ?  I thought
> that was the main reason that only 2.6.21 could read both forms.
>
> David Carlson
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 11:57 AM Adrien Monteleone <
> adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
>
>> If I recall correctly, dates are represented differently at some point in
>> the 3.x series, but this might only be for SQL.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Adrien
>>
>> > On Feb 9, 2020 w7d40, at 10:21 PM, David Carlson <
>> david.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
>> > expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is
>> > release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.
>> > When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes
>> that
>> > may be at least partially mentioned in other threads here.  They do not
>> > specify if there are any changes in the database variations, but there
>> > probably are.
>> >
>> > David Carlson
>>
>> ___
>> gnucash-user mailing list
>> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
>> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
>> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
>> -
>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>>
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Adrien Monteleone]

The importer did see great improvement in this area in 3.x, but I don’t know 
how much that affected the data in the file. (unless some field/flag was added 
to assist the revamped code) I’m sure there were other changes, but I can’t 
think of them at the moment. (so far, we’ve listed this, dates, and config 
locations, with dates being the only one I can think of that certainly affected 
the data file)

Regards,
Adrien

> On Feb 10, 2020 w7d41, at 2:10 PM, David Carlson 
>  wrote:
> 
> Isn't there also a change to the transaction matching scheme ?  I thought 
> that was the main reason that only 2.6.21 could read both forms.
> 
> David Carlson 


___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Geert Janssens]

Op maandag 10 februari 2020 21:17:22 CET schreef Adrien Monteleone:
> The importer did see great improvement in this area in 3.x, but I don’t 
know
> how much that affected the data in the file. (unless some field/flag was
> added to assist the revamped code) I’m sure there were other changes, 
but I
> can’t think of them at the moment. (so far, we’ve listed this, dates, and
> config locations, with dates being the only one I can think of that
> certainly affected the data file)
> 
The training data collected by the import matcher will indeed be stored in 
a different format in the 3.x series. In the 2.6.x series only the very last 
version, 2.6.21 will be able to process it.

Geert
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Adrien Monteleone]

Thanks Geert, good to know.

Regards,
Adrien

> On Feb 10, 2020 w7d41, at 3:24 PM, Geert Janssens 
>  wrote:
> 
> Op maandag 10 februari 2020 21:17:22 CET schreef Adrien Monteleone:
> > The importer did see great improvement in this area in 3.x, but I don’t know
> > how much that affected the data in the file. (unless some field/flag was
> > added to assist the revamped code) I’m sure there were other changes, but I
> > can’t think of them at the moment. (so far, we’ve listed this, dates, and
> > config locations, with dates being the only one I can think of that
> > certainly affected the data file)
> > 
> The training data collected by the import matcher will indeed be stored in a 
> different format in the 3.x series. In the 2.6.x series only the very last 
> version, 2.6.21 will be able to process it.
>  
> Geert


___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Derek Atkins]

Colin Law  writes:

> On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 15:21, Wirawan Purwanto  wrote:
>>
>> Hi David, thanks for clarification. For every major release (either
>> 2.x or 3.x series), is there a guarantee for file format
>> compatibility?
>
> Upwards, yes I believe so.  Any migration necessary would be handled
> by gnucash itself.  There is no guarantee that a 3.x file will work in
> 2.x though in practice it may be ok.

First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and 3.x.
This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases, with
minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the major
release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.

We try to guarantee one-major-release backwards.  So e.g. 3.x will be
readable by 2.6.21 (the latest 2.6 release), but we don't guarantee
anything with older major releases (e.g. 2.4.x).

We also try hard to guarantee forward release compatibility, so 3.x
should be able to read 2.6, 2.4, and probably even 2.2 (or older) data
files.

Note, however, that sometimes there are new features that by definition
will be incompatible.  We also try to make those features optional, so
you only make your data file unreadable by older version if you use
those new-in-X features.

Hope this helps,

> Colin

> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

-derek

-- 
   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
   de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com
   Computer and Internet Security Consultant
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Peter West]

So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2. etc 
were all subsequent minor releases?

Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In that case, 
3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all qualify as 3.x.

It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I still haven’t.

Peter
--
Peter West
p...@pbw.id.au
“For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, 
envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”

> On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...
> 
> Peter West  writes:
> 
>> I assume that you mean:
>> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor releases. So 
>> the
>> next major release will be 4.0.
>> 
>> Is this the case?
> 
> I said exactly what I mean.
> 
> Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and 3.1,
> 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
> cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
> first release in the 4.x release cycle.
> 
>>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins  wrote:
>> 
>>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and 3.x.
>>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases, with
>>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the major
>>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
> 
> -derek
> 
> -- 
>   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
>   de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com
>   Computer and Internet Security Consultant

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first minor
release in that series.

David Carlson

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West  wrote:

> So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2.
> etc were all subsequent minor releases?
>
> Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In that
> case, 3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all qualify
> as 3.x.
>
> It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I still
> haven’t.
>
> Peter
> --
> Peter West
> p...@pbw.id.au
> “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual
> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit,
> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
>
> > On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...
> >
> > Peter West  writes:
> >
> >> I assume that you mean:
> >> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor releases.
> So the
> >> next major release will be 4.0.
> >>
> >> Is this the case?
> >
> > I said exactly what I mean.
> >
> > Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and 3.1,
> > 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
> > cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
> > first release in the 4.x release cycle.
> >
> >>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins  wrote:
> >>
> >>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and 3.x.
> >>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases, with
> >>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the major
> >>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
> >
> > -derek
> >
> > --
> >   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
> >   de...@ihtfp.com www.ihtfp.com
> >   Computer and Internet Security Consultant
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Peter West]

So is there a release called 3.x?

Only a few days ago, someone said that he had upgrades from 3.x, and was asked 
just which release he had upgraded from, which is a perfectly reasonable 
question.

All I can do is repeat my previous question, but I’m beginning to doubt I’ll 
get an answer. It’s like dealing with Pope Francis, who relishes ambiguity.

Peter

--
Peter West
p...@pbw.id.au
“For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, 
envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”

> On 13 Feb 2020, at 1:21 am, David Carlson  wrote:
> 
> I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first minor 
> release in that series.
> 
> David Carlson 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West  > wrote:
> So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2. 
> etc were all subsequent minor releases?
> 
> Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In that case, 
> 3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all qualify as 3.x.
> 
> It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I still 
> haven’t.
> 
> Peter
> --
> Peter West
> p...@pbw.id.au 
> “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, 
> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
> 
> > On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins  > > wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...
> > 
> > Peter West mailto:p...@pbw.id.au>> writes:
> > 
> >> I assume that you mean:
> >> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor releases. So 
> >> the
> >> next major release will be 4.0.
> >> 
> >> Is this the case?
> > 
> > I said exactly what I mean.
> > 
> > Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and 3.1,
> > 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
> > cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
> > first release in the 4.x release cycle.
> > 
> >>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins  >> > wrote:
> >> 
> >>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and 3.x.
> >>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases, with
> >>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the major
> >>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
> > 
> > -derek
> > 
> > -- 
> >   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
> >   de...@ihtfp.com  www.ihtfp.com 
> > 
> >   Computer and Internet Security Consultant
> 
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org 
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user 
> 
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists 
>  for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Colin Law]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 16:44, Peter West  wrote:
>
> So is there a release called 3.x?

The first digit is the major release number, so the current major
release number is 3 and the next major release will be the first one
starting with 4.  The second digit is the minor release number, so 3.7
is major release 3, minor 7.

This is known as Sematic Versioning, GC doesn't stick exactly to this
concept but it is pretty close
https://semver.org/

Colin

>
> Only a few days ago, someone said that he had upgrades from 3.x, and was 
> asked just which release he had upgraded from, which is a perfectly 
> reasonable question.
>
> All I can do is repeat my previous question, but I’m beginning to doubt I’ll 
> get an answer. It’s like dealing with Pope Francis, who relishes ambiguity.
>
> Peter
>
> --
> Peter West
> p...@pbw.id.au
> “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, 
> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
>
> > On 13 Feb 2020, at 1:21 am, David Carlson  
> > wrote:
> >
> > I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first minor 
> > release in that series.
> >
> > David Carlson
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West  > > wrote:
> > So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2. 
> > etc were all subsequent minor releases?
> >
> > Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In that 
> > case, 3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all qualify 
> > as 3.x.
> >
> > It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I still 
> > haven’t.
> >
> > Peter
> > --
> > Peter West
> > p...@pbw.id.au 
> > “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
> > immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, 
> > sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
> >
> > > On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins  > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...
> > >
> > > Peter West mailto:p...@pbw.id.au>> writes:
> > >
> > >> I assume that you mean:
> > >> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor releases. 
> > >> So the
> > >> next major release will be 4.0.
> > >>
> > >> Is this the case?
> > >
> > > I said exactly what I mean.
> > >
> > > Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and 3.1,
> > > 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
> > > cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
> > > first release in the 4.x release cycle.
> > >
> > >>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins  > >> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and 3.x.
> > >>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases, with
> > >>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the major
> > >>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
> > >
> > > -derek
> > >
> > > --
> > >   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
> > >   de...@ihtfp.com  www.ihtfp.com 
> > > 
> > >   Computer and Internet Security Consultant
> >
> > ___
> > gnucash-user mailing list
> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org 
> > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user 
> > 
> > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
> > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists 
> >  for more information.
> > -
> > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Stephen M. Butler]

On 2/12/20 8:57 AM, Colin Law wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 16:44, Peter West  wrote:
>> So is there a release called 3.x?

More directly, there is no "3.x" release.  There have been 3.0, 3.1,
3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 releases in the 3.x series.  Where
"x" stands for the minor release number.

> The first digit is the major release number, so the current major
> release number is 3 and the next major release will be the first one
> starting with 4.  The second digit is the minor release number, so 3.7
> is major release 3, minor 7.
>
> This is known as Sematic Versioning, GC doesn't stick exactly to this
> concept but it is pretty close
> https://semver.org/
>
> Colin
>
>> Only a few days ago, someone said that he had upgrades from 3.x, and was 
>> asked just which release he had upgraded from, which is a perfectly 
>> reasonable question.
>>
>> All I can do is repeat my previous question, but I’m beginning to doubt I’ll 
>> get an answer. It’s like dealing with Pope Francis, who relishes ambiguity.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> --
>> Peter West
>> p...@pbw.id.au
>> “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
>> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, 
>> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
>>
>>> On 13 Feb 2020, at 1:21 am, David Carlson  
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first minor 
>>> release in that series.
>>>
>>> David Carlson
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West >> > wrote:
>>> So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2. 
>>> etc were all subsequent minor releases?
>>>
>>> Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In that 
>>> case, 3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all qualify 
>>> as 3.x.
>>>
>>> It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I still 
>>> haven’t.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>> --
>>> Peter West
>>> p...@pbw.id.au 
>>> “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual 
>>> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, 
>>> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
>>>
 On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins >>> > wrote:

 Hi,

 Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...

 Peter West mailto:p...@pbw.id.au>> writes:

> I assume that you mean:
> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor releases. 
> So the
> next major release will be 4.0.
>
> Is this the case?
 I said exactly what I mean.

 Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and 3.1,
 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
 cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
 first release in the 4.x release cycle.

>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins  > wrote:
>
>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and 3.x.
>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases, with
>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the major
>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
 -derek

 --
   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
   de...@ihtfp.com  www.ihtfp.com 
 
   Computer and Internet Security Consultant

-- 
Stephen M Butler, PMP, PSM
stephen.m.butle...@gmail.com
kg...@arrl.net
253-350-0166
---
GnuPG Fingerprint:  8A25 9726 D439 758D D846 E5D4 282A 5477 0385 81D8

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

Yes, there is a major release 3.x but it is a bucket containing minor
releases, which you can install on your computer.  As you know, the first
number is zero, so the first minor release in the release 3.x bucket is
release 3.0.

David Carlson

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 10:57 AM Colin Law  wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 16:44, Peter West  wrote:
> >
> > So is there a release called 3.x?
>
> The first digit is the major release number, so the current major
> release number is 3 and the next major release will be the first one
> starting with 4.  The second digit is the minor release number, so 3.7
> is major release 3, minor 7.
>
> This is known as Sematic Versioning, GC doesn't stick exactly to this
> concept but it is pretty close
> https://semver.org/
>
> Colin
>
> >
> > Only a few days ago, someone said that he had upgrades from 3.x, and was
> asked just which release he had upgraded from, which is a perfectly
> reasonable question.
> >
> > All I can do is repeat my previous question, but I’m beginning to doubt
> I’ll get an answer. It’s like dealing with Pope Francis, who relishes
> ambiguity.
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > --
> > Peter West
> > p...@pbw.id.au
> > “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual
> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit,
> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
> >
> > > On 13 Feb 2020, at 1:21 am, David Carlson 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first minor
> release in that series.
> > >
> > > David Carlson
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West  p...@pbw.id.au>> wrote:
> > > So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1,
> 3.2. etc were all subsequent minor releases?
> > >
> > > Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In
> that case, 3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all
> qualify as 3.x.
> > >
> > > It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I still
> haven’t.
> > >
> > > Peter
> > > --
> > > Peter West
> > > p...@pbw.id.au 
> > > “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual
> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit,
> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
> > >
> > > > On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins  de...@ihtfp.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...
> > > >
> > > > Peter West mailto:p...@pbw.id.au>> writes:
> > > >
> > > >> I assume that you mean:
> > > >> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor
> releases. So the
> > > >> next major release will be 4.0.
> > > >>
> > > >> Is this the case?
> > > >
> > > > I said exactly what I mean.
> > > >
> > > > Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and
> 3.1,
> > > > 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
> > > > cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
> > > > first release in the 4.x release cycle.
> > > >
> > > >>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins  > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x and
> 3.x.
> > > >>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major* releases,
> with
> > > >>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the
> major
> > > >>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
> > > >
> > > > -derek
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
> > > >   de...@ihtfp.com 
> www.ihtfp.com 
> > > >   Computer and Internet Security Consultant
> > >
> > > ___
> > > gnucash-user mailing list
> > > gnucash-user@gnucash.org 
> > > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user <
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user>
> > > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists <
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists> for more information.
> > > -
> > > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> > > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> >
> > ___
> > gnucash-user mailing list
> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> > -
> > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subs

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

If Gnucash releases had codenames like some Linux releases such as Debian,
it might be easier to understand.  The first Debian "buster" release was
Debian 10.0.

David Carlson

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 11:22 AM David Carlson 
wrote:

> Yes, there is a major release 3.x but it is a bucket containing minor
> releases, which you can install on your computer.  As you know, the first
> number is zero, so the first minor release in the release 3.x bucket is
> release 3.0.
>
> David Carlson
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 10:57 AM Colin Law  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 16:44, Peter West  wrote:
>> >
>> > So is there a release called 3.x?
>>
>> The first digit is the major release number, so the current major
>> release number is 3 and the next major release will be the first one
>> starting with 4.  The second digit is the minor release number, so 3.7
>> is major release 3, minor 7.
>>
>> This is known as Sematic Versioning, GC doesn't stick exactly to this
>> concept but it is pretty close
>> https://semver.org/
>>
>> Colin
>>
>> >
>> > Only a few days ago, someone said that he had upgrades from 3.x, and
>> was asked just which release he had upgraded from, which is a perfectly
>> reasonable question.
>> >
>> > All I can do is repeat my previous question, but I’m beginning to doubt
>> I’ll get an answer. It’s like dealing with Pope Francis, who relishes
>> ambiguity.
>> >
>> > Peter
>> >
>> > --
>> > Peter West
>> > p...@pbw.id.au
>> > “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual
>> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit,
>> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
>> >
>> > > On 13 Feb 2020, at 1:21 am, David Carlson <
>> david.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first
>> minor release in that series.
>> > >
>> > > David Carlson
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West > p...@pbw.id.au>> wrote:
>> > > So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1,
>> 3.2. etc were all subsequent minor releases?
>> > >
>> > > Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In
>> that case, 3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all
>> qualify as 3.x.
>> > >
>> > > It took me a while to work out what you were saying, and maybe I
>> still haven’t.
>> > >
>> > > Peter
>> > > --
>> > > Peter West
>> > > p...@pbw.id.au 
>> > > “For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual
>> immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit,
>> sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.”
>> > >
>> > > > On 13 Feb 2020, at 12:54 am, Derek Atkins > de...@ihtfp.com>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > Please remember to CC gnucash-user on all replies...
>> > > >
>> > > > Peter West mailto:p...@pbw.id.au>> writes:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I assume that you mean:
>> > > >> 3.0 is the major release, and 3.1, 3.2. etc are all the minor
>> releases. So the
>> > > >> next major release will be 4.0.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Is this the case?
>> > > >
>> > > > I said exactly what I mean.
>> > > >
>> > > > Technically, 3.0 was the first of the 3.x major-release cycle, and
>> 3.1,
>> > > > 3.2, etc were all subsequent minor releases of the 3.x major-release
>> > > > cycle.  The next major release will be 4.x, starting with 4.0 as its
>> > > > first release in the 4.x release cycle.
>> > > >
>> > > >>On 12 Feb 2020, at 2:12 am, Derek Atkins > > wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>First, note that we changed the numbering scheme between 2.x
>> and 3.x.
>> > > >>This means that 2.0, 2.2, 2.4, and 2.6 are all *major*
>> releases, with
>> > > >>minor releases denoted in the third number.  Whereas 3.x is the
>> major
>> > > >>release and 3.0, 3.1, etc. are all the minor releases.
>> > > >
>> > > > -derek
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > >   Derek Atkins 617-623-3745
>> > > >   de...@ihtfp.com 
>> www.ihtfp.com 
>> > > >   Computer and Internet Security Consultant
>> > >
>> > > ___
>> > > gnucash-user mailing list
>> > > gnucash-user@gnucash.org 
>> > > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>> > > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user <
>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user>
>> > > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists <
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists> for more information.
>> > > -
>> > > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>> > > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>> >
>> > ___
>> > gnucash-user mailing list
>> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org
>> > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>> > https://lists.gnuca

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Adrien Monteleone]

I’m not sure that makes it any clearer as 10.1 is *also* codenamed ‘Buster’. 
(the entire Debian 10 version, all releases, are ‘buster’) 

I think this is a confusion of terminology.

It appears the questioner thought that a ‘major release’ is a specific singular 
release and that minor releases follow the major one.

The confusion is in referring to ‘major’ as a 'release’ when it in fact is a 
‘version’. There is no such thing as a ‘major release’. There are several 
releases for each major ‘version’. There will of course, always be a first x.0 
release of a major version. (and we are now on release #9, dubbed 3.8 of the 
major version 3 of GnuCash)

As described previously, major *versions* were '2.4', '2.6', and now '3'.

The reason for this difference is that prior to 3.0, a 3-number scheme was 
used. (fundamental.major.minor/bug-fix)

So there were several minor or 'bug-fix' releases in the 2.4.x series/version.

The same for the 2.6.x series/version. (the last of which was 2.6.21)

Development versions were odd-numbered. (‘2.5’, ‘2.7’ for example)

The third number was dropped for 3.0 (which would have been 2.8.0 had the old 
scheme continued) There were long explanations and discussions as to why this 
change was made. (now it is ‘major.minor’)

There will be ‘3.9xx' versions (the first being '3.901’) which are the 
development versions in the run-up to version ‘4’, the first release of which 
will be ‘4.0’. If the pattern holds, there will at some point then be ‘4.9xx’ 
development versions in the run-up to version ‘5’.


For the official outline of version numbering see the wiki: 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Development_Process#Release_Version_Numbering

And for the planned release schedule: 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule

Regards,
Adrien



> On Feb 12, 2020 w7d43, at 11:40 AM, David Carlson 
>  wrote:
> 
> If Gnucash releases had codenames like some Linux releases such as Debian,
> it might be easier to understand.  The first Debian "buster" release was
> Debian 10.0.
> 
> David Carlson


___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[David Carlson]

Adrian,

I think your explanation is much clearer than mine was.  Thanks

David Carlson

On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 4:34 PM Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:

> I’m not sure that makes it any clearer as 10.1 is *also* codenamed
> ‘Buster’. (the entire Debian 10 version, all releases, are ‘buster’)
>
> I think this is a confusion of terminology.
>
> It appears the questioner thought that a ‘major release’ is a specific
> singular release and that minor releases follow the major one.
>
> The confusion is in referring to ‘major’ as a 'release’ when it in fact is
> a ‘version’. There is no such thing as a ‘major release’. There are several
> releases for each major ‘version’. There will of course, always be a first
> x.0 release of a major version. (and we are now on release #9, dubbed 3.8
> of the major version 3 of GnuCash)
>
> As described previously, major *versions* were '2.4', '2.6', and now '3'.
>
> The reason for this difference is that prior to 3.0, a 3-number scheme was
> used. (fundamental.major.minor/bug-fix)
>
> So there were several minor or 'bug-fix' releases in the 2.4.x
> series/version.
>
> The same for the 2.6.x series/version. (the last of which was 2.6.21)
>
> Development versions were odd-numbered. (‘2.5’, ‘2.7’ for example)
>
> The third number was dropped for 3.0 (which would have been 2.8.0 had the
> old scheme continued) There were long explanations and discussions as to
> why this change was made. (now it is ‘major.minor’)
>
> There will be ‘3.9xx' versions (the first being '3.901’) which are the
> development versions in the run-up to version ‘4’, the first release of
> which will be ‘4.0’. If the pattern holds, there will at some point then be
> ‘4.9xx’ development versions in the run-up to version ‘5’.
>
>
> For the official outline of version numbering see the wiki:
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Development_Process#Release_Version_Numbering
>
> And for the planned release schedule:
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule
>
> Regards,
> Adrien
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 2020 w7d43, at 11:40 AM, David Carlson <
> david.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If Gnucash releases had codenames like some Linux releases such as
> Debian,
> > it might be easier to understand.  The first Debian "buster" release was
> > Debian 10.0.
> >
> > David Carlson
>
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Geert Janssens]

Op woensdag 12 februari 2020 23:32:31 CET schreef Adrien 
Monteleone:


> There will be ‘3.9xx' versions (the first being '3.901’)

The first one will probably be 3.900. Other than that you're all 
correct.

Geert

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] GNUCash XML format compatibility

[Adrien Monteleone]

Thanks,

I wasn’t sure because the first wiki page indicates 3.900, but the release 
schedule has 3.901 as the first. Either is trivial I suppose. It will be 
whatever ya’ll want it to be.

Regards,
Adrien

> On Feb 13, 2020 w7d44, at 2:44 AM, Geert Janssens 
>  wrote:
> 
> Op woensdag 12 februari 2020 23:32:31 CET schreef Adrien Monteleone:
> 
>  
> > There will be ‘3.9xx' versions (the first being '3.901’)
>  
> The first one will probably be 3.900. Other than that you're all correct.
>  
> Geert


___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.