Am Dienstag, 14. Dezember 2010 schrieb Phil Longstaff:
> Sounds good. What, if anything, is required for a 2.4.0 official release
> over and above 2.3.X RC release?
Given the current lack of resources for activities beyond getting the code
running, I would say just make the same steps as usual.
plit view will be
Is there a way to solve them?
Regards
Cristian
[1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=635386
Il 16/12/2010 19:16, David T. ha scritto:
--- On Thu, 12/16/10, Derek Atkins wrote:
From: Derek Atkins
Subject: Re: Let's really release 2.4.0 soon
To: "David T."
Cc: "g
--- On Thu, 12/16/10, Derek Atkins wrote:
> From: Derek Atkins
> Subject: Re: Let's really release 2.4.0 soon
> To: "David T."
> Cc: "gnucash-devel" , "Christian Stimming"
>
> Date: Thursday, December 16, 2010, 5:21 AM
> "David T.
On 12/16/2010 08:55 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
On Thursday 16 December 2010, Derek Atkins wrote:
"David T." writes:
Yes, but the documentation can generally be released after
2.4.0. IMHO.
Sure. I was mainly expressing concern about the file format issues
that the new version raises. There has
Geert Janssens writes:
> On Tuesday 14 December 2010, Phil Longstaff wrote:
>> Sounds good. What, if anything, is required for a 2.4.0 official release
>> over and above 2.3.X RC release?
>>
>> As usual, I'll do the tarballs and release notes.
>>
>> Phil
>> -
>> I used to be a hypocho
On Tuesday 14 December 2010, Phil Longstaff wrote:
> Sounds good. What, if anything, is required for a 2.4.0 official release
> over and above 2.3.X RC release?
>
> As usual, I'll do the tarballs and release notes.
>
> Phil
> -
> I used to be a hypochondriac AND a kleptomaniac. So I too
On Wednesday 15 December 2010, Derek Atkins wrote:
> "David T." writes:
> > As a user, I agree, although it would be nice if 635357 were addressed.
>
> Yes, but the documentation can generally be released after 2.4.0. IMHO.
>
Sure, I think it would be best to get the important documentation upd
On Thursday 16 December 2010, Derek Atkins wrote:
> "David T." writes:
> >> Yes, but the documentation can generally be released after
> >> 2.4.0. IMHO.
> >
> > Sure. I was mainly expressing concern about the file format issues
> > that the new version raises. There has been work on this bug by
"David T." writes:
>> Yes, but the documentation can generally be released after
>> 2.4.0. IMHO.
>
> Sure. I was mainly expressing concern about the file format issues
> that the new version raises. There has been work on this bug by
> Cristian Marchi today, and it looks like my concerns are add
--- On Wed, 12/15/10, Derek Atkins wrote:
> From: Derek Atkins
> Subject: Re: Let's really release 2.4.0 soon
> To: "David T."
> Cc: "gnucash-devel" , "Christian Stimming"
>
> Date: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 7:06 AM
> "Davi
"David T." writes:
> As a user, I agree, although it would be nice if 635357 were addressed.
Yes, but the documentation can generally be released after 2.4.0. IMHO.
> On that bug, I looked at the sections in question, but don't see a quick fix.
> Not having done any saving in database format
hile.
David
--- On Tue, 12/14/10, Christian Stimming wrote:
> From: Christian Stimming
> Subject: Let's really release 2.4.0 soon
> To: "gnucash-devel"
> Date: Tuesday, December 14, 2010, 12:05 PM
> The subject says it all: We don't
> have any further
From: Christian Stimming
To: gnucash-devel
Sent: Tue, December 14, 2010 3:05:38 PM
Subject: Let's really release 2.4.0 soon
The subject says it all: We don't have any further bug with milestone 2.4.0
open, with the exception of 4 documentation issues:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/bugl
The subject says it all: We don't have any further bug with milestone 2.4.0
open, with the exception of 4 documentation issues:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=GnuCash&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=2.4.0
However, (al
14 matches
Mail list logo
