Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Thomas Forrester]

That is a truly useful suggestion.  Makes sense!  Thank you!

On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 2:11 AM cicko  wrote:

> Adrien Monteleone-2 wrote
> > There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved
> > by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during
> > the interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a
> > few annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked
> out.
>
> Also, if you take the latest build from
> https://code.gnucash.org/builds/win32/maint/ (Windows!), you can get some
> extra bug fixes that will only be officially released by October.
> In general, I find these releases a bit more stable than the stable
> versions. :) This is due to the fact that they contain mostly bug fixes and
> no new features as such.
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GnuCash-User-f1415819.html
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Stephen M. Butler]

On 08/06/2018 09:09 PM, David Carlson wrote:
> I would consider needing to close and reopen a bank account register after
> each transaction edit executed by pasting some text from the clipboard to
> be a major showstopper when I have ten or twenty transaction s a day.
>
> David C

And for me the backspace key doesn't work.  So, I avoid pasting (but I
can touch type enough to shock my mother-in-law who taught keyboarding
in high school).
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018, 10:42 PM Michael via gnucash-user <
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org> wrote:
>
>> I guess I hadn't tried to do a paste into a transaction.  I see what
>> you mean, although I didn't need to restart gnucash to recover.  While
>> I was typing the answer came from David Reiser that it will be fixed
>> when 3.3 comes out.  Mike
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Thomas Forrester
>>  wrote:
>>> Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you
>>> use
>>> the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of
>>> that. or
>>> apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you
>>> restart the
>>> program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
>>> consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just
>>> to get
>>> it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
>>> corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience
>>> it
>>> causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it
>>> will
>>> take.
>>>
>>> If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1
>>> (or
>>> whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But
>>> a few
>>> more months till something happens, well, um...
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
>>> adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
>>>
  You may not get a warning or alert!

  Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and
 this
  is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall
 correctly. I
  wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d
 ask, what in
  particular are you finding that you need to step back for?

  There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been
 solved
  by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML
 during the
  interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are
 a few
  annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked
 out.

  Regards,
  Adrien

  > On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester
 
  wrote:
  >
  > Thanks, Mike.
  >
  > So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data
 structures check
  > that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
  > incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I
 find I have
  > the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed
 that
  > version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
  >
  > Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible
 with a
  .21
  > database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data
 structures that
  > would make this a really bad idea?
  >
  > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
  >
  >> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is
 compatible
  >> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully
 with 3.2
  >> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I
 believe
  that
  >> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
  >>
  >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester
 >>>  >
  >> wrote:
  >>
  >> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it
 was back
  >> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till
 3.2 to
  >> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release
 Having
  now
  >> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue
 with
  going
  >> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data
 structure
  >> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge
 mistake? I
  am
  >> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point
 that, if I
  >> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
  clipboard,
  >> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.


-- 
Stephen M Butler, PMP, PSM
stephen.m.butle...@gmail.com
kg...@arrl.net
253-350-0166
---
GnuPG Fingerprint:  8A25 9726 D439 758D D846 E5D4 282A 5477 0385 81D8

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Thomas Forrester]

For me, Dave, I *am* importing transactions.  These are transactions coming
from the banks I do business with and they have the typical all-caps,
hacked-up wording the ACH applies to the transactions.  I'm actually trying
to clean them up.  Yes, I suppose I could go into the qfx file and clean it
up there before import, but, well, no.  I'm supposed to be able to do it
more easily (and safely) in GnuCash, not some random text editor.



On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:28 PM David Reiser via gnucash-user <
gnucash-user@gnucash.org> wrote:

> Do you always have to edit a transaction after pasting it? You only have
> to close and reopen the register if you have to use the delete key after
> pasting. If I had to cut and paste that many transaction elements a day,
> I’d figure out a way to export the source to CSV and import them instead of
> copy/paste.
>
> I guess I’m jaded because my file is big enough that type-ahead works so
> well I almost never have to paste anything in, and I’m usually only typing
> a few characters per field, except for the amount columns.
>
> Everyone gets to pick which annoyances count as showstoppers for them.
> --
> Dave Reiser
> dbrei...@icloud.com
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 7, 2018, at 12:09 AM, David Carlson 
> wrote:
> >
> > I would consider needing to close and reopen a bank account register
> after
> > each transaction edit executed by pasting some text from the clipboard to
> > be a major showstopper when I have ten or twenty transaction s a day.
> >
> > David C
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018, 10:42 PM Michael via gnucash-user <
> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I guess I hadn't tried to do a paste into a transaction.  I see what
> >> you mean, although I didn't need to restart gnucash to recover.  While
> >> I was typing the answer came from David Reiser that it will be fixed
> >> when 3.3 comes out.  Mike
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Thomas Forrester
> >>  wrote:
> >>> Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you
> >>> use
> >>> the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of
> >>> that. or
> >>> apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you
> >>> restart the
> >>> program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
> >>> consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just
> >>> to get
> >>> it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
> >>> corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience
> >>> it
> >>> causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it
> >>> will
> >>> take.
> >>>
> >>> If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1
> >>> (or
> >>> whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But
> >>> a few
> >>> more months till something happens, well, um...
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
> >>> adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> >>>
>  You may not get a warning or alert!
> 
>  Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and
>  this
>  is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall
>  correctly. I
>  wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d
>  ask, what in
>  particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
> 
>  There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been
>  solved
>  by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML
>  during the
>  interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are
>  a few
>  annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked
>  out.
> 
>  Regards,
>  Adrien
> 
> > On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester
>  
>  wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Mike.
> >
> > So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data
>  structures check
> > that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> > incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I
>  find I have
> > the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed
>  that
> > version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> >
> > Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible
>  with a
>  .21
> > database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data
>  structures that
> > would make this a really bad idea?
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> >
> >> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is
>  compatible
> >> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully
>  with 3.2
> >> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I
>  believe
>  that
> >> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester
>   >
> >> wrote:
> >>

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[nor via gnucash-user]

GNC 3.2 has problems with reports and i believe it is being fixed with 3.3
release,  in particuler Tax Invoice report. However, I use 2.6.19 portable
with 3.2 data file in xml to print Tax Invoice.nor



-
nor
--
Sent from: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GnuCash-User-f1415819.html
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Thomas Forrester]

I will look at this again closely in light of your reply, Dave.  My
experience has been that no further edits are possible, period, but I will
experiment a bit more next time it happens.  Closing and restarting GnuCash
was a solution noted in a much earlier thread on this topic and I don't
recall any one saying closing and reopening the register was sufficient to
get unstuck.

Thanks.

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 10:36 PM David Reiser  wrote:

> In my experience the pasting-prevents-delete-key-action bug only affects
> the particular register in which the pasting occurred. And fixing the
> problem only requires closing that register and reopening it, not
> relaunching gnucash itself.
>
> Also, while the delete key is impeded, you can select text and type
> corrections directly. You still can’t select text and delete it, so you’ll
> have to type at least one character to replace any mistakes until you close
> and reopen the register.
>
> The bug is fixed for 3.3, scheduled for release at the end of September.
> The team has been very good lately at hitting release dates.
> --
> Dave Reiser
> dbrei...@icloud.com
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 6, 2018, at 11:12 PM, Thomas Forrester 
> wrote:
> >
> > Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you use
> > the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of that.
> or
> > apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you restart
> the
> > program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
> > consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just to
> get
> > it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
> > corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience it
> > causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it will
> > take.
> >
> > If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1 (or
> > whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But a
> few
> > more months till something happens, well, um...
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
> > adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> >
> >> You may not get a warning or alert!
> >>
> >> Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and this
> >> is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall correctly. I
> >> wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d ask,
> what in
> >> particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
> >>
> >> There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been
> solved
> >> by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during
> the
> >> interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a few
> >> annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Adrien
> >>
> >>> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, Mike.
> >>>
> >>> So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures
> check
> >>> that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> >>> incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I
> have
> >>> the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
> >>> version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> >>>
> >>> Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a
> >> .21
> >>> database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures
> that
> >>> would make this a really bad idea?
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> >>>
>  It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is
> compatible
>  with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
>  data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe
> >> that
>  is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
> 
>  On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester <
> tlforres...@gmail.com
> >>>
>  wrote:
> 
>  On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was
> back
>  when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
>  notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having
> >> now
>  used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with
> >> going
>  back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
>  changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I
> >> am
>  using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
>  can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
> >> clipboard,
>  that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
>  ___ gnucash-user mailing
> >> list
>  gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or
> to
>  unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If
> 

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Adrien Monteleone]

Also, there are no more bug-fix releases. (the 3rd point) Just Major.minor. 
Occasionally, if there is a packaging error, they’ll so a snap “-1” or “-2" 
release to address it so you have an installable candidate.

Regards,
Adrien

> On Aug 7, 2018, at 2:43 AM, Adrien Monteleone 
>  wrote:
> 
> Sorry I missed the original post somehow. But as noted in the replies after 
> this, there are sufferable work arounds and the fix is already in. Certainly, 
> I’m a bit annoyed with no backspace about 10 times a day from muscle memory, 
> but I can live with it till 3.3 is official.
> 
> Note, 3.1 didn’t have this problem, just 3.2. I made the jump so I could go 
> back to sqlite3 since some critical bugs were fixed. And I knew going in this 
> bug was already found and a pest. I didn’t realize just how it messes with my 
> workflow, but overall, it’s worth the upgrade, at least for me.
> 
> Regards,
> Adrien
> 
>> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:12 PM, Thomas Forrester  wrote:
>> 
>> Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you use the 
>> clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of that. or 
>> apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you restart the 
>> program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever consider 
>> with any program - having to restart it all the time just to get it working 
>> again.  I should think this massive problem would have been corrected almost 
>> immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience it causes, but it has 
>> been quite a while and I have no clue how long it will take.
>> 
>> If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1 (or 
>> whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But a few 
>> more months till something happens, well, um...
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone 
>>  wrote:
>> You may not get a warning or alert!
>> 
>> Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and this is 
>> particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall correctly. I 
>> wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d ask, what in 
>> particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
>> 
>> There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved by 
>> 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during the 
>> interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a few 
>> annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Adrien
>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Mike.
>>> 
>>> So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures check
>>> that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
>>> incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I have
>>> the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
>>> version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
>>> 
>>> Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a .21
>>> database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures that
>>> would make this a really bad idea?
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
>>> 
 It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible
 with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
 data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe that
 is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
 
 On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester 
 wrote:
 
 On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was back
 when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
 notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having now
 used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with going
 back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
 changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I am
 using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
 can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the clipboard,
 that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
 ___ gnucash-user mailing list
 gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to
 unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
 you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
 https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. -
 Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by
 using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
 
 
>>> ___
>>> gnucash-user mailing list
>>> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
>>> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>>> 

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Adrien Monteleone]

Sorry I missed the original post somehow. But as noted in the replies after 
this, there are sufferable work arounds and the fix is already in. Certainly, 
I’m a bit annoyed with no backspace about 10 times a day from muscle memory, 
but I can live with it till 3.3 is official.

Note, 3.1 didn’t have this problem, just 3.2. I made the jump so I could go 
back to sqlite3 since some critical bugs were fixed. And I knew going in this 
bug was already found and a pest. I didn’t realize just how it messes with my 
workflow, but overall, it’s worth the upgrade, at least for me.

Regards,
Adrien

> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:12 PM, Thomas Forrester  wrote:
> 
> Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you use the 
> clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of that. or 
> apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you restart the 
> program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever consider 
> with any program - having to restart it all the time just to get it working 
> again.  I should think this massive problem would have been corrected almost 
> immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience it causes, but it has 
> been quite a while and I have no clue how long it will take.
> 
> If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1 (or 
> whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But a few 
> more months till something happens, well, um...
> 
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone 
>  wrote:
> You may not get a warning or alert!
> 
> Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and this is 
> particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall correctly. I 
> wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d ask, what in 
> particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
> 
> There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved by 
> 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during the 
> interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a few 
> annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.
> 
> Regards,
> Adrien
> 
> > On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester  wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks, Mike.
> > 
> > So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures check
> > that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> > incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I have
> > the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
> > version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> > 
> > Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a .21
> > database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures that
> > would make this a really bad idea?
> > 
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> > 
> >> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible
> >> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
> >> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe that
> >> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
> >> 
> >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester 
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was back
> >> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
> >> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having now
> >> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with going
> >> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
> >> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I am
> >> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
> >> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the clipboard,
> >> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
> >> ___ gnucash-user mailing list
> >> gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to
> >> unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
> >> you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> >> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. -
> >> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by
> >> using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> >> 
> >> 
> > ___
> > gnucash-user mailing list
> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
> > https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> > -
> > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> > 
> 
> 
> ___
> gnucash-user 

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[cicko]

Adrien Monteleone-2 wrote
> There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved
> by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during
> the interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a
> few annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.

Also, if you take the latest build from
https://code.gnucash.org/builds/win32/maint/ (Windows!), you can get some
extra bug fixes that will only be officially released by October.
In general, I find these releases a bit more stable than the stable
versions. :) This is due to the fact that they contain mostly bug fixes and
no new features as such.



--
Sent from: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/GnuCash-User-f1415819.html
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Liz]

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 23:36:23 -0400
David Reiser via gnucash-user  wrote:

> In my experience the pasting-prevents-delete-key-action bug only
> affects the particular register in which the pasting occurred. And
> fixing the problem only requires closing that register and reopening
> it, not relaunching gnucash itself.
> 
> Also, while the delete key is impeded, you can select text and type
> corrections directly. You still can’t select text and delete it, so
> you’ll have to type at least one character to replace any mistakes
> until you close and reopen the register.
> 
> The bug is fixed for 3.3, scheduled for release at the end of
> September. The team has been very good lately at hitting release
> dates.


I struck this today, and also found that highlighting the offending
string with the mouse allowed me to edit. I also found the backspace key
non-functional.

I didn't try replacing a string with a space where I needed to
eliminate something.

Debian Buster/Sid - XFCE - GnuCash Version: 3.2 Build ID: 3.2+ (2018-06-24)
Unlike Thomas I didn't find it a showstopper today.

Liz
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[David Reiser via gnucash-user]

Do you always have to edit a transaction after pasting it? You only have to 
close and reopen the register if you have to use the delete key after pasting. 
If I had to cut and paste that many transaction elements a day, I’d figure out 
a way to export the source to CSV and import them instead of copy/paste.

I guess I’m jaded because my file is big enough that type-ahead works so well I 
almost never have to paste anything in, and I’m usually only typing a few 
characters per field, except for the amount columns.

Everyone gets to pick which annoyances count as showstoppers for them.
--
Dave Reiser
dbrei...@icloud.com





> On Aug 7, 2018, at 12:09 AM, David Carlson  
> wrote:
> 
> I would consider needing to close and reopen a bank account register after
> each transaction edit executed by pasting some text from the clipboard to
> be a major showstopper when I have ten or twenty transaction s a day.
> 
> David C
> 
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018, 10:42 PM Michael via gnucash-user <
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org> wrote:
> 
>> I guess I hadn't tried to do a paste into a transaction.  I see what
>> you mean, although I didn't need to restart gnucash to recover.  While
>> I was typing the answer came from David Reiser that it will be fixed
>> when 3.3 comes out.  Mike
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Thomas Forrester
>>  wrote:
>>> Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you
>>> use
>>> the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of
>>> that. or
>>> apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you
>>> restart the
>>> program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
>>> consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just
>>> to get
>>> it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
>>> corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience
>>> it
>>> causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it
>>> will
>>> take.
>>> 
>>> If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1
>>> (or
>>> whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But
>>> a few
>>> more months till something happens, well, um...
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
>>> adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
>>> 
 You may not get a warning or alert!
 
 Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and
 this
 is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall
 correctly. I
 wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d
 ask, what in
 particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
 
 There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been
 solved
 by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML
 during the
 interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are
 a few
 annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked
 out.
 
 Regards,
 Adrien
 
> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester
 
 wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Mike.
> 
> So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data
 structures check
> that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I
 find I have
> the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed
 that
> version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> 
> Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible
 with a
 .21
> database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data
 structures that
> would make this a really bad idea?
> 
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> 
>> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is
 compatible
>> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully
 with 3.2
>> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I
 believe
 that
>> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester
  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it
 was back
>> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till
 3.2 to
>> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release
 Having
 now
>> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue
 with
 going
>> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data
 structure
>> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge
 mistake? I
 am
>> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point
 that, if I
>> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
 clipboard,
>> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can 

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[David Carlson]

I would consider needing to close and reopen a bank account register after
each transaction edit executed by pasting some text from the clipboard to
be a major showstopper when I have ten or twenty transaction s a day.

David C

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018, 10:42 PM Michael via gnucash-user <
gnucash-user@gnucash.org> wrote:

> I guess I hadn't tried to do a paste into a transaction.  I see what
> you mean, although I didn't need to restart gnucash to recover.  While
> I was typing the answer came from David Reiser that it will be fixed
> when 3.3 comes out.  Mike
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Thomas Forrester
>  wrote:
> > Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you
> > use
> > the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of
> > that. or
> > apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you
> > restart the
> > program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
> > consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just
> > to get
> > it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
> > corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience
> > it
> > causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it
> > will
> > take.
> >
> > If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1
> > (or
> > whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But
> > a few
> > more months till something happens, well, um...
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
> > adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> >
> >>  You may not get a warning or alert!
> >>
> >>  Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and
> >> this
> >>  is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall
> >> correctly. I
> >>  wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d
> >> ask, what in
> >>  particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
> >>
> >>  There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been
> >> solved
> >>  by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML
> >> during the
> >>  interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are
> >> a few
> >>  annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked
> >> out.
> >>
> >>  Regards,
> >>  Adrien
> >>
> >>  > On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester
> >> 
> >>  wrote:
> >>  >
> >>  > Thanks, Mike.
> >>  >
> >>  > So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data
> >> structures check
> >>  > that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> >>  > incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I
> >> find I have
> >>  > the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed
> >> that
> >>  > version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> >>  >
> >>  > Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible
> >> with a
> >>  .21
> >>  > database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data
> >> structures that
> >>  > would make this a really bad idea?
> >>  >
> >>  > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> >>  >
> >>  >> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is
> >> compatible
> >>  >> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully
> >> with 3.2
> >>  >> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I
> >> believe
> >>  that
> >>  >> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
> >>  >>
> >>  >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester
> >>  >>  >
> >>  >> wrote:
> >>  >>
> >>  >> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it
> >> was back
> >>  >> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till
> >> 3.2 to
> >>  >> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release
> >> Having
> >>  now
> >>  >> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue
> >> with
> >>  going
> >>  >> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data
> >> structure
> >>  >> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge
> >> mistake? I
> >>  am
> >>  >> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point
> >> that, if I
> >>  >> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
> >>  clipboard,
> >>  >> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
> >>  >> ___ gnucash-user
> >> mailing
> >>  list
> >>  >> gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences
> >> or to
> >>  >> unsubscribe:
> >> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
> >>  >> you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> >>  >> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more
> >> information. -
> >>  >> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do
> >> this by
> >>  >> using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> >>  >>
> >>  >>
> >>  > ___
> >>  > gnucash-user mailing 

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Michael via gnucash-user]

I guess I hadn't tried to do a paste into a transaction.  I see what 
you mean, although I didn't need to restart gnucash to recover.  While 
I was typing the answer came from David Reiser that it will be fixed 
when 3.3 comes out.  Mike


On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 8:12 PM, Thomas Forrester 
 wrote:
Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you 
use
the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of 
that. or
apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you 
restart the

program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just 
to get

it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience 
it
causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it 
will

take.

If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1 
(or
whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But 
a few

more months till something happens, well, um...

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:


 You may not get a warning or alert!

 Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and 
this
 is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall 
correctly. I
 wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d 
ask, what in

 particular are you finding that you need to step back for?

 There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been 
solved
 by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML 
during the
 interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are 
a few
 annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked 
out.


 Regards,
 Adrien

 > On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester 


 wrote:
 >
 > Thanks, Mike.
 >
 > So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data 
structures check

 > that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
 > incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I 
find I have
 > the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed 
that

 > version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
 >
 > Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible 
with a

 .21
 > database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data 
structures that

 > would make this a really bad idea?
 >
 > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
 >
 >> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is 
compatible
 >> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully 
with 3.2
 >> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I 
believe

 that
 >> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
 >>
 >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester 

 >
 >> wrote:
 >>
 >> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it 
was back
 >> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 
3.2 to
 >> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release 
Having

 now
 >> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue 
with

 going
 >> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data 
structure
 >> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge 
mistake? I

 am
 >> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point 
that, if I

 >> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
 clipboard,
 >> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
 >> ___ gnucash-user 
mailing

 list
 >> gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences 
or to
 >> unsubscribe: 
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If

 >> you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
 >> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more 
information. -
 >> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do 
this by

 >> using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
 >>
 >>
 > ___
 > gnucash-user mailing list
 > gnucash-user@gnucash.org
 > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
 > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
 > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
 https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
 > -
 > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
 > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
 >


 ___
 gnucash-user mailing list
 gnucash-user@gnucash.org
 To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
 https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
 If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
 https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
 -
 Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
 You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[David Reiser via gnucash-user]

In my experience the pasting-prevents-delete-key-action bug only affects the 
particular register in which the pasting occurred. And fixing the problem only 
requires closing that register and reopening it, not relaunching gnucash itself.

Also, while the delete key is impeded, you can select text and type corrections 
directly. You still can’t select text and delete it, so you’ll have to type at 
least one character to replace any mistakes until you close and reopen the 
register.

The bug is fixed for 3.3, scheduled for release at the end of September. The 
team has been very good lately at hitting release dates.
--
Dave Reiser
dbrei...@icloud.com





> On Aug 6, 2018, at 11:12 PM, Thomas Forrester  wrote:
> 
> Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you use
> the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of that. or
> apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you restart the
> program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
> consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just to get
> it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
> corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience it
> causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it will
> take.
> 
> If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1 (or
> whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But a few
> more months till something happens, well, um...
> 
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
> adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> 
>> You may not get a warning or alert!
>> 
>> Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and this
>> is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall correctly. I
>> wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d ask, what in
>> particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
>> 
>> There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved
>> by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during the
>> interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a few
>> annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Adrien
>> 
>>> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Thanks, Mike.
>>> 
>>> So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures check
>>> that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
>>> incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I have
>>> the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
>>> version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
>>> 
>>> Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a
>> .21
>>> database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures that
>>> would make this a really bad idea?
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
>>> 
 It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible
 with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
 data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe
>> that
 is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
 
 On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester >> 
 wrote:
 
 On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was back
 when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
 notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having
>> now
 used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with
>> going
 back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
 changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I
>> am
 using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
 can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
>> clipboard,
 that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
 ___ gnucash-user mailing
>> list
 gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to
 unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
 you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
 https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. -
 Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by
 using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
 
 
>>> ___
>>> gnucash-user mailing list
>>> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
>>> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
>>> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
>>> -
>>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Thomas Forrester]

Well, in particular, what I mentioned in the original post: once you use
the clipboard to paste into a transaction, all further editing of that. or
apparently anything else is just not going to happen until you restart the
program.  To me, that's about the biggest show-stopper I could ever
consider with *any* program - having to restart it all the time just to get
it working again.  I should think this massive problem would have been
corrected almost immediately given the magnitude of the inconvenience it
causes, but it has been quite a while and I have no clue how long it will
take.

If someone can tell me it's already been fixed and there is a 3.2.1 (or
whatever) release due any second now, great!  I'll wait it out.  But a few
more months till something happens, well, um...

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 11:18 AM Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:

> You may not get a warning or alert!
>
> Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and this
> is particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall correctly. I
> wouldn’t attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d ask, what in
> particular are you finding that you need to step back for?
>
> There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved
> by 3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during the
> interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a few
> annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.
>
> Regards,
> Adrien
>
> > On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester 
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, Mike.
> >
> > So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures check
> > that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> > incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I have
> > the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
> > version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> >
> > Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a
> .21
> > database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures that
> > would make this a really bad idea?
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> >
> >> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible
> >> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
> >> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe
> that
> >> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was back
> >> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
> >> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having
> now
> >> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with
> going
> >> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
> >> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I
> am
> >> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
> >> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
> clipboard,
> >> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
> >> ___ gnucash-user mailing
> list
> >> gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to
> >> unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
> >> you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> >> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. -
> >> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by
> >> using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> >>
> >>
> > ___
> > gnucash-user mailing list
> > gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> > To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> > If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> > -
> > Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> > You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> >
>
>
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Adrien Monteleone]

You may not get a warning or alert!

Also, yes, at the very least the date/time stamps are different and this is 
particularly an issue with the MySQL backend if I recall correctly. I wouldn’t 
attempt to step back any further than 2.6.21, but I’d ask, what in particular 
are you finding that you need to step back for?

There were some early issues with data but those seem to have been solved by 
3.2. (I’m using the sqlite3 backend, and had to switch to XML during the 
interim but am back to normal with the 3.2 release) Sure there are a few 
annoyances with the 3.x series so far, but those are being worked out.

Regards,
Adrien

> On Aug 6, 2018, at 10:15 AM, Thomas Forrester  wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Mike.
> 
> So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures check
> that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
> incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I have
> the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
> version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.
> 
> Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a .21
> database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures that
> would make this a really bad idea?
> 
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:
> 
>> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible
>> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
>> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe that
>> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was back
>> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
>> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having now
>> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with going
>> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
>> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I am
>> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
>> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the clipboard,
>> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
>> ___ gnucash-user mailing list
>> gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to
>> unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
>> you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. -
>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by
>> using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>> 
>> 
> ___
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> 


___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Michael via gnucash-user]

I don't know, but I haven't noticed any.  One of the experts would have 
to answer for sure.  Mike




On 08/06/2018 08:15 AM, Thomas Forrester wrote:

Thanks, Mike.

So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures 
check that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that 
is incompatible with the data version. Checking my downloads, I find I 
have the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed 
that version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.


Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a 
.21 database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data 
structures that would make this a really bad idea?


On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael > wrote:


It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is
compatible with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21
successfully with 3.2 data, but older 2.6.x report that they are
not compatible.  I believe that is true of xml and sql databases. 
Mike

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester
mailto:tlforres...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it
was back when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took
me till 3.2 to notice, but I think it was within a few days of
the 3.2 release Having now used 3.2 for a short while, I'm
wondering if there's any issue with going back to 2.6.x? In other
words, are there any underlying data structure changes, or other
file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I am using the
MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the
clipboard, that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go
forward. ___
gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org
 To update your subscription
preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you
are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
- Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You
can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.




___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Thomas Forrester]

Thanks, Mike.

So from what you are saying, there is some sort of data structures check
that would alert me if I am using a version of the program that is
incompatible with the data version.  Checking my downloads, I find I have
the .21 installer which I wouldn't have unless I had installed that
version.  So Looks like I may be good to take a step back.

Maybe a corollary question then -  although backward compatible with a .21
database, does 3.x introduce any new changes to the data structures that
would make this a really bad idea?

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:26 AM Michael  wrote:

> It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible
> with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2
> data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe that
> is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester 
> wrote:
>
> On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was back
> when I first noticed version 3 had been released. Took me till 3.2 to
> notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release Having now
> used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any issue with going
> back to 2.6.x? In other words, are there any underlying data structure
> changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge mistake? I am
> using the MySQL database backend. I just feel at this point that, if I
> can't further edit anything after pasting something in from the clipboard,
> that it may be a better idea to go back so I can go forward.
> ___ gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to
> unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If
> you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. -
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by
> using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>
>
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Re: [GNC] Going Back to Go Forward?

[Michael via gnucash-user]

It is my understanding that 2.6.21 is the only 2.6.x that is compatible 
with the 3.2 data structure.  I have used 2.6.21 successfully with 3.2 
data, but older 2.6.x report that they are not compatible.  I believe 
that is true of xml and sql databases.  Mike


On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 4:17 AM, Thomas Forrester 
 wrote:
On a Windows computer, I upgraded to 3.2 from 2.6.20 I think it was 
back

when I first noticed version 3 had been released.  Took me till 3.2 to
notice, but I think it was within a few days of the 3.2 release

Having now used 3.2 for a short while, I'm wondering if there's any 
issue
with going back to 2.6.x?  In other words, are there any underlying 
data

structure changes, or other file changes, that would make this a huge
mistake?  I am using the MySQL database backend.

I just feel at this point that, if I can't further edit anything after
pasting something in from the clipboard, that it may be a better idea 
to go

back so I can go forward.
___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.

-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

___
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.