-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Derek Atkins schrieb: > 1) This patch doesn't actually change any data formats, because there's > no data in those fields. So without additional changes (which I agree > should not get backported), there's no chance of a data format change.
Does that mean this code doesn't write any data (in the KVP fields) if and only if there isn't any data written during runtime? If yes, then I'd happily accept that code, BUT we'd have to be really sure we don't accidentally back-port any of the code that would introduce data into those kvp fields. > Keep in mind that just making the XML parser not blow chunks on > unrecognized tags isn't sufficient -- we also need to re-write out > those unrecognized tags or we destroy data. Reading and silently > discarding is worse than erroring out. *sigh* You're probably right, although a crashing gnucash is always not a good thing. We should have some different method available if users want to read a non-backward-compatible file, with the clear notion that this will almost certainly mean data loss. Something like "Import gnucash file from other version" or similar. > So, I argue that this change still is safe because it's effectively > unused code, but it would let us add additional information in a 2.2 > release and not destroy that data in 2.0, which is why I think we should > backport this change. I agree on the backport. Christian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBRX7IH2XAi+BfhivFAQKQNgQAsTOv6O3XpNqsbPCY8hnIrQhX7N/EuxOc Og4ZMbaKtPWVvuyWQeGGx3NsSqo00O1QZRXLIOqaJUhz0u6Hal5wGrfzu0YtPnXv BWKXldvrFeVHFqSERmgGMLPjl3xqmMGpkJDsu/FZsYfHm4KIBJ4J+pRNbJ11bJWx LQG8MyCcmOc= =lwvE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
