Re: Change Boost dependency to 1.54 or above?

[Leon Taylor]

Centos focuses on being ultra-stable, so all of centos' packages are
very old. I think centos 6 is still using the 2.6 linux kernel.
Thanks, Leon

On Sat, 2017-09-02 at 14:36 -0700, Sumit Bhardwaj wrote:
> Sounds good. I didn't realize Centos 7 was that far behind.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sumit
> 
> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 1:19 PM, Geert Janssens  it.be>
> wrote:
> 
> > On zaterdag 2 september 2017 09:35:17 CEST Sumit Bhardwaj wrote:
> > > Some time back, John had asked if we can move our Boost
> > > dependency to
> > 
> > 1.54
> > > or above so we can use Boost::log. I wanted to check back to see
> > > if we
> > 
> > are
> > > at a point where we can move Boost from 1.53 which is where we
> > > have it
> > 
> > now.
> > > 
> > > For reference, Fedora 22 shipped on May 26, 2015 with Boost
> > > version 1.58.
> > > Fedora 26 has version 1.63 and Boost's latest version is 1.65.
> > > 
> > 
> > Fedora is not a very good reference to determine the lower limit of
> > package
> > versions. It generally is very close to upstream.
> > 
> > The distros to check are the long-term supported ones: RHEL/Centos,
> > Ubuntu
> > LTS, Debian stable,...
> > 
> > For Ubuntu we currently still have to support 14.04LTS (Trusty),
> > because
> > that's what our test environment on Travis uses. That platform
> > however is
> > ok.
> > It has boost 1.54 and 1.55 is available as well.
> > 
> > Debian stable was at 1.55 last time I checked.
> > 
> > RHEL/Centos 7 unfortunately are only at boost 1.53. There are ways
> > to get
> > more
> > recent versions of boost there, but that would mean either building
> > from
> > scratch or configuring a foreign repository. If we require that we
> > essentially
> > state we're no longer supporting RHEL/Centos 7.
> > 
> > I'm inclined not to do that and stick with 1.53 instead.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Geert
> > 
> 
> ___
> 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

Changing to C++

[Leon Taylor]

Hi all,

I recently saw the blog post on how the project is going to be re-written
in C++.
I understand that I am not to decide where the project goes or what happens
to it, but if it is not to late, I personally think that we should re-think
making the change to C++.
I understand the GObject is a pain in the ass to use and learn, and that
C++ is a better choice for developing desktop software (not to mention that
there more libraries available for C++), but I (personally) think that
re-writing the source code is counter-productive.
Many people do not want to use C++, as it is very complex and hard to use
properly. I know that you said it would be easier for people to learn C++
than GObject, but I disagree. Many people know C and how to use it
PROPERLY, whereas only experienced C++ developers can use it properly. I
think the only thing changing to C++ would do is scare off contributors.
This is just *my *opinion, so just take it with a grain of salt. Please
tell me if I have misunderstood something or taken something the wrong way.

Thanks, Leon.
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel