Thanks,
I wasn’t sure because the first wiki page indicates 3.900, but the release
schedule has 3.901 as the first. Either is trivial I suppose. It will be
whatever ya’ll want it to be.
Regards,
Adrien
> On Feb 13, 2020 w7d44, at 2:44 AM, Geert Janssens
> wrote:
>
> Op woensdag 12 februari
Op woensdag 12 februari 2020 23:32:31 CET schreef Adrien
Monteleone:
> There will be ‘3.9xx' versions (the first being '3.901’)
The first one will probably be 3.900. Other than that you're all
correct.
Geert
___
gnucash-user mailing list
Adrian,
I think your explanation is much clearer than mine was. Thanks
David Carlson
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 4:34 PM Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> I’m not sure that makes it any clearer as 10.1 is *also* codenamed
> ‘Buster’. (the entire Debian 10 version, all
I’m not sure that makes it any clearer as 10.1 is *also* codenamed ‘Buster’.
(the entire Debian 10 version, all releases, are ‘buster’)
I think this is a confusion of terminology.
It appears the questioner thought that a ‘major release’ is a specific singular
release and that minor releases
If Gnucash releases had codenames like some Linux releases such as Debian,
it might be easier to understand. The first Debian "buster" release was
Debian 10.0.
David Carlson
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 11:22 AM David Carlson
wrote:
> Yes, there is a major release 3.x but it is a bucket containing
Yes, there is a major release 3.x but it is a bucket containing minor
releases, which you can install on your computer. As you know, the first
number is zero, so the first minor release in the release 3.x bucket is
release 3.0.
David Carlson
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 10:57 AM Colin Law wrote:
>
On 2/12/20 8:57 AM, Colin Law wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 16:44, Peter West wrote:
>> So is there a release called 3.x?
More directly, there is no "3.x" release. There have been 3.0, 3.1,
3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 releases in the 3.x series. Where
"x" stands for the minor
On Wed, 12 Feb 2020 at 16:44, Peter West wrote:
>
> So is there a release called 3.x?
The first digit is the major release number, so the current major
release number is 3 and the next major release will be the first one
starting with 4. The second digit is the minor release number, so 3.7
is
So is there a release called 3.x?
Only a few days ago, someone said that he had upgrades from 3.x, and was asked
just which release he had upgraded from, which is a perfectly reasonable
question.
All I can do is repeat my previous question, but I’m beginning to doubt I’ll
get an answer. It’s
I believe Derek said 3.x is a major release and 3.0 is the first minor
release in that series.
David Carlson
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020, 9:08 AM Peter West wrote:
> So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2.
> etc were all subsequent minor releases?
>
> Saying 3.x is
So it is correct to say that 3.0 was the major release, and that 3.1, 3.2. etc
were all subsequent minor releases?
Saying 3.x is the major release is ambiguous, to say the least. In that case,
3.1, 3.2, etc would all be major releases, because they all qualify as 3.x.
It took me a while to
Colin Law writes:
> On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 15:21, Wirawan Purwanto wrote:
>>
>> Hi David, thanks for clarification. For every major release (either
>> 2.x or 3.x series), is there a guarantee for file format
>> compatibility?
>
> Upwards, yes I believe so. Any migration necessary would be
Thanks Geert, good to know.
Regards,
Adrien
> On Feb 10, 2020 w7d41, at 3:24 PM, Geert Janssens
> wrote:
>
> Op maandag 10 februari 2020 21:17:22 CET schreef Adrien Monteleone:
> > The importer did see great improvement in this area in 3.x, but I don’t know
> > how much that affected the data
Op maandag 10 februari 2020 21:17:22 CET schreef Adrien Monteleone:
> The importer did see great improvement in this area in 3.x, but I don’t
know
> how much that affected the data in the file. (unless some field/flag was
> added to assist the revamped code) I’m sure there were other changes,
The importer did see great improvement in this area in 3.x, but I don’t know
how much that affected the data in the file. (unless some field/flag was added
to assist the revamped code) I’m sure there were other changes, but I can’t
think of them at the moment. (so far, we’ve listed this, dates,
I omitted the word import as in transaction import matching scheme.
David Carlson
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 2:10 PM David Carlson
wrote:
> Isn't there also a change to the transaction matching scheme ? I thought
> that was the main reason that only 2.6.21 could read both forms.
>
> David Carlson
Isn't there also a change to the transaction matching scheme ? I thought
that was the main reason that only 2.6.21 could read both forms.
David Carlson
On Mon, Feb 10, 2020, 11:57 AM Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.montele...@lusfiber.net> wrote:
> If I recall correctly, dates are represented
If I recall correctly, dates are represented differently at some point in the
3.x series, but this might only be for SQL.
Regards,
Adrien
> On Feb 9, 2020 w7d40, at 10:21 PM, David Carlson
> wrote:
>
> According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
> expected to
According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
expected to read data files that have been touched by a 3.x version is
release 2.6.21, possibly with a suffix depending on the OS it is run in.
When a file is first touched by 3.x there are some unspecified changes that
may
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 at 15:21, Wirawan Purwanto wrote:
>
> Hi David, thanks for clarification. For every major release (either
> 2.x or 3.x series), is there a guarantee for file format
> compatibility?
Upwards, yes I believe so. Any migration necessary would be handled
by gnucash itself. There
Hi David, thanks for clarification. For every major release (either
2.x or 3.x series), is there a guarantee for file format
compatibility?
Wirawan
On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 11:21 PM David Carlson
wrote:
>
> According to the developers, the only pre-3.x version of GnuCash that is
> expected to
Wirawan,
I don't think anyone has mapped out the changes in data file structures.
That information will be contained in the Release Notes for each version.
The 2.6 to 3 transition involved some changes in the locations that user
configuration files are located in on the various systems which are
Hi,
I wonder if anyone has a pointer on the changes in Gnucash XML format
that can cause incompatibility across program versions. I have a
scenario where one OS uses Gnucash 2.6.x series whereas the other uses
3.5. I am concerned when transporting data file back and forth, if
there is corruption
23 matches
Mail list logo
