On 24/02/2019 08:44, Geert Janssens wrote:
Completely agree in today's context. There have been reasons in the past it
was done as it is. If someone has spare time and epxerience I gladly accept
patches to fix this technical debt.
There was nothing to fix in this regard in gnc 2.x
gnc 3.x changed things, do *not* try and escape this, Geert!
gnc 3.x made things worse not better in this regard. Understand?
The fact that we even need a wiki page dedicated to file and configuration
locations-- let alone one as long and convoluted as the one we have (and
which needs additional diagramming)-- only underscores this problem.
No, it underscores the dev team's willingness to be as open as possible about
the complexities of a mature cross-platform application. Many applications
store (meta)data is locations defined by the context.
I know what you are saying, Geert, you are also wrong. The
implementation of those concepts in gnc 3.x is a disaster for some, e.g
I have charities that cannot use gnc 3.x
I must ask again, because I do not want to shoot the messenger, who
thought this change from 2.x to 3.x was a good idea? Who proposed it?
Did the person that proposed it understand what they were suggesting
meant for all people or just for themselves?
This change is fundamentally wrong to what I understand the gnc ethos to
be. People should have access to their own data, people should control
their own data, people's data should be where they expect it to be.
Geert, the way you are talking it sounds like you voted for Facebook.
Go search for
libreoffice's metadata for example, or firefox'. If you would want to document
their metadata structures, you'd see something similar or even more complex.
I know both those programs and know where they store stuff. You may
recall I mentioned portableapps.com a while ago so don't be surprised
/someone else knows about where other apps put stuff.
In short, documenting metdata structures about gnc is mainly done. So
shut up and do something useful, please.
Part of the complexity comes from the multi-platform nature of gnucash. Each
platform defines their own default locations for various kinds of data. And
gnucash tries to apply these per platform.
Geert: I think you just made another lie in pubic.
The question is: should it? It is a lie that where to put files was an
issue in getting gnc implemented on Windows.
gnucash should be thinking for itself.
if you go for the "each platform says where things should go" I will
have access to your file and you will have access to mine in one years time.
Try using your fucking brain for independent thought once!
I want to be clear that I am truly grateful that Chris has decided to work
on reports, and I have great respect for his ability to work with Scheme.
I've yet to succeed in either editing an existing report or getting a third
party report installed on my Mac. 13 years of futility on that front!
Yes, unfortunately this isn't very user friendly. I'm sure it can be improved.
Again it requires someone with time available and coding experience to
implement it.
There is no person with coding experience available, get used to it.
Move on.
I also notice that I am being told to move on, who do you think is right
or wrong, Geert?
--
Wm
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
