I think: the transition 3.x to 4.x is roughly: - new features incompatible to current code go into 4.x - 3.x can potentially understand/read 4.x datafiles - unused code in 3.x can get marked deprecated - bug fixes and code cleanup in 3.x - 3.x is merged into 4.x periodically so that 4.x receive bugfixes and code cleanup - deprecated code in 3.x can be removed in 4.x
Result: any datafile saved in 3.x should be readable by 4.x, but not viceversa. On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 at 04:30, jean <rip...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have a possibly silly question. If the migration to 4.0 is somewhat > near, what point is there in cleaning up the code in 3.x or removing > hacks etc or even adding new features? > Am I missing something? > Jean > > On 3/23/20 5:55 PM, Chris Graves wrote: > > For all you devs, it’s understood(or it should be) that what you do for > this project is a labor of love. Take your time, relax and just enjoy the > fixes/enhancements that you bring to this project. Who cares if a deadline > needs to slip, just have fun!!! > > > > Thank you devs!!! > > Chris > > > >> On Mar 23, 2020, at 5:22 PM, John Ralls <jra...@ceridwen.us> wrote: > >> > >> It's up in the air. The major sticking point is that I'm working on a > major rewrite of the options system from an ugly mixture of C and Scheme to > C++. I'd hoped to have it far enough along by now to start test releases, > but it's not. The back end is mostly done and I'm 3/4 through with the GUI. > After that is making sure that the Scheme API is compatible. (It's the > c++options branch in my GitHub repo if you want to have a look. I haven't > committed the GUI stuff yet, it doesn't build.) We'll have to discuss > whether to proceed to user testing without it or slip the 4.0 release when > Geert gets back from travel. > >> > >> Regards, > >> John Ralls > >> > >> > >>> On Mar 23, 2020, at 2:17 PM, Jean Laroche <rip...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> How far along are you on 4.0? Is the planned 28 June 2020 release > reasonable? > >>> J. > >>> > >>> On 3/23/20 2:12 PM, Christopher Lam wrote: > >>>> For a /very/ high level overview, see the design goals at > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule > >>>> Or, write tests and refactor the existing hacks. > >>>> Or, feel free to squash bugs at leisure! > >>>> On Mon, 23 Mar 2020 at 17:16, jeanl <rip...@gmail.com <mailto: > rip...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>> Devs, > >>>> Can you point me to something you think needs to be looked at > sooner > >>>> rather > >>>> than later in the gnucash code? I find that bugzilla does not give > a > >>>> good > >>>> image of bug priority, but I'm sure you guys have a good idea of > >>>> what needs > >>>> to be fixed next. I wouldn't mind helping with that. > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Jean > >>>> -- > >>>> Sent from: > >>>> http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GnuCash-Dev-f1435356.html > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> gnucash-devel mailing list > >>>> gnucash-devel@gnucash.org <mailto:gnucash-devel@gnucash.org> > >>>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> gnucash-devel mailing list > >>> gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > >>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> gnucash-devel mailing list > >> gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > >> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-devel mailing list > gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel