Wait, can't you just pin beangulp to 3.0.x using a lockfile? If we switch to versions (vs. always-at-head development), I believe you have to do that.
Stability is a relative concept; I don't think I've ever stated a specific version-related stability guarantee. (You're assuming minor version stable on the API front.) On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 3:00 AM Daniele Nicolodi <[email protected]> wrote: > On 20/01/25 06:16, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi Martin, > > > > my importer is failing with beancount v 3.1.0 with the below error: > > Beancount release 3.1.0 contains backward incompatible changes that need > to be addressed in projects that depend on Beancount. The required > changes have been implemented in beangulp, but a release has not be cut > yet. I'll do that ASAP. > > I'm not happy with the recent changes in the development practices in > Beancount. The diminished care for backward compatibility changes has > been justified by the desire of making it easier for new contributors to > work on Beancount. However, so far, this approach did not result in any > contributed bugfix or feature, therefore I remain skeptical that giving > up the codebase stability is really helping anything. > > Cheers, > Dan > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Beancount" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/cbe1b5c4-777f-4fb3-a586-3f2265568b6a%40grinta.net > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhPfmb77UwykK%2BQzjZ3mTD9xfVkkdU0AbWbTRerzQB0BuQ%40mail.gmail.com.
