GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release of 2.6.4. Surprising! Though I gather the package maintainer(s) is (are) closing some outstanding bugs reported in Debian. ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : > I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but > haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release > of 2.6.4. I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% 29/2.6.4/ If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been announced long in advance (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the deadline. I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. -- .''`.Sébastien Villemot : :' :Debian Developer `. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien `- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
On Sunday 28 September 2014 18:49:26 Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : > > I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, > > but haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for > > the release of 2.6.4. > > I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% > 29/2.6.4/ > > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > announced long in advance > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > deadline. > > I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. Actually we're waiting for the Windows installer to get compiled. We release on three platforms at once so all packages should be there before we can push a release announcement. The compilation of the installer appears to take a lot of time (I just checked on the build server, it was still running). So we will have to wait a little more still. Geert ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Design Docu - Archtitecture
Hi John and Christian, Thanks for the feedback. Happy to see that you read and even edit the page. -> Also, controllers are the code that interacts with the model to change data. It need not be GUI: E.g., importers are controllers. Glad to hear this. I was guessing so, but did not dare ... I have removed the engine part and if I get the message right this section should actually go back to the goals chapter as it hasn't really been followed up so far. It also means that I would like to drop this topic because I would rather like to document "what has been done until now" instead of "what should have been done". -> the current implementation is a mess with pieces of each component intermingled and spread throughout the code-base Well, that might be the true, but I prefer not to put it like that in a "what has been done until now" docu :-) Maybe we can go bottom up. What data objects are there that would be part of the Model if the MVC had been adhered to? Or is this all capsuled by QOF? Could we say QOF is the Model? Kind regards, Carsten ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : >> I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but >> haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release >> of 2.6.4. > > I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% > 29/2.6.4/ > > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > announced long in advance > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > deadline. > > I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows and Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to happen the night before the release to set up for those builds. If you’ve already released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until after the announcement hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a problem with either of those builds will cause me to make changes to the tarballs which would make your Debian package mismatch the official release. Regards, John Ralls ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: Design Docu - Archtitecture
On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:58 AM, Carsten Rinke wrote: > Hi John and Christian, > > Thanks for the feedback. Happy to see that you read and even edit the page. > > -> Also, controllers are the code that interacts with the model to change > data. It need not be GUI: E.g., importers are controllers. > > Glad to hear this. I was guessing so, but did not dare ... > > I have removed the engine part and if I get the message right this section > should actually go back to the goals chapter as it hasn't really been > followed up so far. > It also means that I would like to drop this topic because I would rather > like to document "what has been done until now" instead of "what should have > been done". > > -> the current implementation is a mess with pieces of each component > intermingled and spread throughout the code-base > > Well, that might be the true, but I prefer not to put it like that in a "what > has been done until now" docu :-) Why not? The point of the document is to help new developers get their heads around the current code. The fact that you can’t depend on code being where it belongs is an important tip. > > Maybe we can go bottom up. > > What data objects are there that would be part of the Model if the MVC had > been adhered to? > Or is this all capsuled by QOF? Could we say QOF is the Model? No. QOF has some bits of the model. It’s original purpose is the query mechanism, which is more glue than model. Other glue bits are QofObject and QofCollection. There are basic datatypes in there, too: GUID, gnc_numeric, gnc_date, as well as QofSession and QofBackend which handle loading and saving. The model bits are QofInstance, which is the base class of all of the first-class Model classes, and QofBook, which is the container class for a set of accounts. All of the other first-class model classes’ headers are in src/engine, but not all of the code which directly writes their data is. To find it all you have to start with a GUI item and trace the calls that implement a particular behavior. You’ll find pieces in app-utils, business, core-utils, gnome, gnome-search, gnome-utils, register, and scm. Not all of it is in C. The first-class Model classes are the ones that are persistent, and the easiest way to identify them is by looking at http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/SQL, especially the ERD that’s linked there. The ERD captures most of the KVP structures that are stuck on to various classes from “outside” code, which the SQL page doesn’t. Regards, John Ralls ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 10:04 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : > On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > > > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : > >> I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but > >> haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release > >> of 2.6.4. > > > > I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: > > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% > > 29/2.6.4/ > > > > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > > announced long in advance > > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > > deadline. > > > > I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. > > The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows and > Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to happen the > night before the release to set up for those builds. If you’ve already > released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until after the announcement > hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a problem with either of those > builds will cause me to make changes to the tarballs which would make your > Debian package mismatch the official release. It is too late for this release, but I'll wait for the official announcement for the next releases. However I think that you should not publish on SourceForge source tarballs that are not considered as final releases. This is very confusing, and can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and problems (as happened to me). Either use a different numbering scheme (like release candidates with a -rcN suffix), or keep them private. -- .''`.Sébastien Villemot : :' :Debian Developer `. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien `- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
On Sep 28, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 10:04 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : >> On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: >> >>> Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release of 2.6.4. >>> >>> I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: >>> >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% >>> 29/2.6.4/ >>> >>> If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been >>> announced long in advance >>> (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the >>> Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the >>> deadline. >>> >>> I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. >> >> The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows and >> Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to happen the >> night before the release to set up for those builds. If you’ve already >> released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until after the >> announcement hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a problem with either >> of those builds will cause me to make changes to the tarballs which would >> make your Debian package mismatch the official release. > > It is too late for this release, but I'll wait for the official > announcement for the next releases. > > However I think that you should not publish on SourceForge source > tarballs that are not considered as final releases. This is very > confusing, and can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and problems > (as happened to me). Either use a different numbering scheme (like > release candidates with a -rcN suffix), or keep them private. It’s only confusing because you jumped the gun and grabbed the tarballs before I announced the release. But I just experimented with the “staging” feature which lets me hide directories (you shouldn’t be able to see 2.6.4 in the list, though you can still get at it if you type it into the URL bar). I’ll use that from now on. Regards, John Ralls ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 12:21 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : > On Sep 28, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > > > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 10:04 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : > >> On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : > I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but > haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release > of 2.6.4. > >>> > >>> I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: > >>> > >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% > >>> 29/2.6.4/ > >>> > >>> If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > >>> announced long in advance > >>> (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > >>> Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > >>> deadline. > >>> > >>> I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. > >> > >> The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows > >> and Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to happen > >> the night before the release to set up for those builds. If you’ve already > >> released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until after the > >> announcement hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a problem with > >> either of those builds will cause me to make changes to the tarballs which > >> would make your Debian package mismatch the official release. > > > > It is too late for this release, but I'll wait for the official > > announcement for the next releases. > > > > However I think that you should not publish on SourceForge source > > tarballs that are not considered as final releases. This is very > > confusing, and can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and problems > > (as happened to me). Either use a different numbering scheme (like > > release candidates with a -rcN suffix), or keep them private. > > It’s only confusing because you jumped the gun and grabbed the tarballs > before I announced the release. But I just experimented with the “staging” > feature which lets me hide directories (you shouldn’t be able to see 2.6.4 in > the list, though you can still get at it if you type it into the URL bar). > I’ll use that from now on. Well, it's confusing because the unreleased tarball is at the exact same place and with the exact same filename than the final tarball! And I have a script that automatically checks for new tarballs at that place (as do most packages in Debian and other distributions). Anyway, thanks for considering to use a private directory from now on. That should fix the issue. For the 2.6.4 case, please let me know if you modify the source tarball. In that case, I will reupload the new tarball in Debian (with a slight modification of the Debian version number, something like 2.6.4+final). -- .''`.Sébastien Villemot : :' :Debian Developer `. `' http://www.dynare.org/sebastien `- GPG Key: 4096R/381A7594 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
On Sep 28, 2014, at 12:30 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 12:21 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : >> On Sep 28, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Sébastien Villemot >> wrote: >> >>> Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 10:04 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : >> I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but >> haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release >> of 2.6.4. > > I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% > 29/2.6.4/ > > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > announced long in advance > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > deadline. > > I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows and Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to happen the night before the release to set up for those builds. If you’ve already released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until after the announcement hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a problem with either of those builds will cause me to make changes to the tarballs which would make your Debian package mismatch the official release. >>> >>> It is too late for this release, but I'll wait for the official >>> announcement for the next releases. >>> >>> However I think that you should not publish on SourceForge source >>> tarballs that are not considered as final releases. This is very >>> confusing, and can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and problems >>> (as happened to me). Either use a different numbering scheme (like >>> release candidates with a -rcN suffix), or keep them private. >> >> It’s only confusing because you jumped the gun and grabbed the tarballs >> before I announced the release. But I just experimented with the “staging” >> feature which lets me hide directories (you shouldn’t be able to see 2.6.4 >> in the list, though you can still get at it if you type it into the URL >> bar). I’ll use that from now on. > > Well, it's confusing because the unreleased tarball is at the exact same > place and with the exact same filename than the final tarball! And I > have a script that automatically checks for new tarballs at that place > (as do most packages in Debian and other distributions). > > Anyway, thanks for considering to use a private directory from now on. > That should fix the issue. > > For the 2.6.4 case, please let me know if you modify the source tarball. > In that case, I will reupload the new tarball in Debian (with a slight > modification of the Debian version number, something like 2.6.4+final). I don’t know what other Debian builders are doing, but I’ll note that GC2.6.4 hasn’t showed up on Fedora or OpenSuse. Besides, you said earlier > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > announced long in advance > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > deadline. So which is it, automatic script or you being too eager? If it’s really an automatic script, I doubt setting staged on the SF directory will fix the issue because your script won’t see that. Ours don’t, and download the tarballs just fine. Having the same name and same place is necessary because our scripts for building need to point to that same place, otherwise they have to be updated twice: Once to build the package and again so that others can use them after the release. Regards, John Ralls ___ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 12:53 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : > On Sep 28, 2014, at 12:30 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > > > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 12:21 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : > >> On Sep 28, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Sébastien Villemot > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 10:04 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : > On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot > wrote: > > > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : > >> I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but > >> haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the > >> release > >> of 2.6.4. > > > > I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: > > > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% > > 29/2.6.4/ > > > > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > > announced long in advance > > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > > deadline. > > > > I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. > > The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows > and Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to > happen the night before the release to set up for those builds. If > you’ve already released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until > after the announcement hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a > problem with either of those builds will cause me to make changes to the > tarballs which would make your Debian package mismatch the official > release. > >>> > >>> It is too late for this release, but I'll wait for the official > >>> announcement for the next releases. > >>> > >>> However I think that you should not publish on SourceForge source > >>> tarballs that are not considered as final releases. This is very > >>> confusing, and can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and problems > >>> (as happened to me). Either use a different numbering scheme (like > >>> release candidates with a -rcN suffix), or keep them private. > >> > >> It’s only confusing because you jumped the gun and grabbed the tarballs > >> before I announced the release. But I just experimented with the “staging” > >> feature which lets me hide directories (you shouldn’t be able to see 2.6.4 > >> in the list, though you can still get at it if you type it into the URL > >> bar). I’ll use that from now on. > > > > Well, it's confusing because the unreleased tarball is at the exact same > > place and with the exact same filename than the final tarball! And I > > have a script that automatically checks for new tarballs at that place > > (as do most packages in Debian and other distributions). > > > > Anyway, thanks for considering to use a private directory from now on. > > That should fix the issue. > > > > For the 2.6.4 case, please let me know if you modify the source tarball. > > In that case, I will reupload the new tarball in Debian (with a slight > > modification of the Debian version number, something like 2.6.4+final). > > I don’t know what other Debian builders are doing, but I’ll note that GC2.6.4 > hasn’t showed up on Fedora or OpenSuse. Besides, you said earlier > > > If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been > > announced long in advance > > (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the > > Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the > > deadline. > > So which is it, automatic script or you being too eager? It's a mixture of both: the script notified me about the new release; then I took the decision to upload despite the lack of official announcement (releases are never uploaded automatically to Debian, for obvious reasons; there is always the need of human intervention). > If it’s really an automatic script, I doubt setting staged on the SF > directory will fix the issue because your script won’t see that. Ours don’t, > and download the tarballs just fine. I verified that the modification that you made works for me. The scripts looks at the top-level sourceforge HTML page and scans for new subdirectories; since you have hidden the 2.6.4 directory, it is no longer seen. > Having the same name and same place is necessary because our scripts for > building need to point to that same place, otherwise they have to be updated > twice: Once to build the package and again so that others can use them after > the release. I understand that it is easier that way. I guess you could nevertheless have an option to select whether to build from the public location, or from a private staging area. Anyway, the solution that you have already implemented works for me (as long as you don't forget to do the same i
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 in Debian
On Sep 28, 2014, at 1:13 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 12:53 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : >> On Sep 28, 2014, at 12:30 PM, Sébastien Villemot >> wrote: >> >>> Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 12:21 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : On Sep 28, 2014, at 10:29 AM, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 10:04 -0700, John Ralls a écrit : >> On Sep 28, 2014, at 9:49 AM, Sébastien Villemot >> wrote: >> >>> Le dimanche 28 septembre 2014 à 11:34 -0500, Tommy Trussell a écrit : I just noticed GnuCash 2.6.4 has been uploaded to Debian Unstable, but haven't seen a notice here or on the GnuCash.org web site for the release of 2.6.4. >>> >>> I indeed uploaded to Debian the 2.6.4 tarball that is available at: >>> >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/gnucash%20%28stable% >>> 29/2.6.4/ >>> >>> If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been >>> announced long in advance >>> (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the >>> Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the >>> deadline. >>> >>> I guess the release announcement is currently being prepared. >> >> The release has not yet officially happened, it’s waiting on the Windows >> and Mac builds. Tagging the release and staging the tarballs has to >> happen the night before the release to set up for those builds. If >> you’ve already released the tarballs to Debian please pull them until >> after the announcement hits the lists. It’s quite possible that a >> problem with either of those builds will cause me to make changes to the >> tarballs which would make your Debian package mismatch the official >> release. > > It is too late for this release, but I'll wait for the official > announcement for the next releases. > > However I think that you should not publish on SourceForge source > tarballs that are not considered as final releases. This is very > confusing, and can lead to all sorts of misunderstandings and problems > (as happened to me). Either use a different numbering scheme (like > release candidates with a -rcN suffix), or keep them private. It’s only confusing because you jumped the gun and grabbed the tarballs before I announced the release. But I just experimented with the “staging” feature which lets me hide directories (you shouldn’t be able to see 2.6.4 in the list, though you can still get at it if you type it into the URL bar). I’ll use that from now on. >>> >>> Well, it's confusing because the unreleased tarball is at the exact same >>> place and with the exact same filename than the final tarball! And I >>> have a script that automatically checks for new tarballs at that place >>> (as do most packages in Debian and other distributions). >>> >>> Anyway, thanks for considering to use a private directory from now on. >>> That should fix the issue. >>> >>> For the 2.6.4 case, please let me know if you modify the source tarball. >>> In that case, I will reupload the new tarball in Debian (with a slight >>> modification of the Debian version number, something like 2.6.4+final). >> >> I don’t know what other Debian builders are doing, but I’ll note that >> GC2.6.4 hasn’t showed up on Fedora or OpenSuse. Besides, you said earlier >> >>> If I was so quick to notice it, it's because the release had been >>> announced long in advance >>> (http://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Release_Schedule) and also because the >>> Debian "Jessie" freeze is getting close and I did not want to miss the >>> deadline. >> >> So which is it, automatic script or you being too eager? > > It's a mixture of both: the script notified me about the new release; > then I took the decision to upload despite the lack of official > announcement (releases are never uploaded automatically to Debian, for > obvious reasons; there is always the need of human intervention). > >> If it’s really an automatic script, I doubt setting staged on the SF >> directory will fix the issue because your script won’t see that. Ours don’t, >> and download the tarballs just fine. > > I verified that the modification that you made works for me. The scripts > looks at the top-level sourceforge HTML page and scans for new > subdirectories; since you have hidden the 2.6.4 directory, it is no > longer seen. > >> Having the same name and same place is necessary because our scripts for >> building need to point to that same place, otherwise they have to be updated >> twice: Once to build the package and again so that others can use them after >> the release. > > I understand that it is easier that way. I guess you could nevertheless > have an option to select whether to build from the public location, or > from a private staging area. An
GnuCash 2.6.4 released
The GnuCash development team proudly announces GnuCash 2.6.4, the fourth maintenance release in the 2.6-stable series. Changes Between 2.6.3 and 2.6.4, the following bugfixes were accomplished: • Bug #120199 - Incorrect sort order in "Sort by Statement Date". • Bug #434462 - register color don't work correct with system theme color. • Bug #509263 - Since Last Run dialog won't allow resizing of Status column. • Bug #610202 - gnucash silently closes when no X11/$DISPLAY is present. • Bug #630638 - 'Process payment' should allow to select equity accounts for payment • Bug #671615 - French: 'New Customer' button in Find Customer dialog is translated to 'Nouvel onglet' • Bug #688965 - Page Up, Page Down keys cause GnuCash to hang. • Bug #692249 - Add Help button in Custom Reports dialog box, • Bug #695240 - mortgage wizard empty table. • Bug #707243 - Hard-coded font colors in account tree? • Bug #711440 - Tab labels have different background colour than containing gui element. • Bug #711567 - Cannot save a custom report if a path contain diacritic chars • Bug #719457 - Template for Home Mortgage Loan isn't properly nested. • Bug #719457 - Template for Home Mortgage Loan isn't properly nested. • Bug #720427 - Review of french account templates • Bug #720934 - Barcharts with many data points have overlapping x-axis labels. • Bug #722140 - Add option to control inclusion of trading accounts in cash flow report. • Bug #722200 - configure script does not pick the correct am_cv_scanf version. • Bug #723145 - Currency display does not respect locale. • Bug #723442 - Report Options - Report Name too short. • Bug #725054 - Re-numbering sub accounts crashes the program. • Bug #725366 - Formula Parsing Error with Scheduled Mortgage Transactions • Bug #726449 - Budget Barchart does not show up if running sum is selected. • Bug #726888 - cancel button is available on all pages of assistant. • Bug #727130 - Crash when newline in Report Title • Bug #727338 - Translation and Account file updates for Latvian. • Bug #728103 - Invoice opened does not contain the Job under circumstances. • Bug #728717 - Ubuntu 14.04 - GNUcash crashes on close. • Bug #728841 - XML backend does not always store KVP slots. • Bug #729157 - Bill Term discount days are allowed to be more than due days. • Bug #729497 - Saved Report Configuration selection window resize. • Bug #730255 - Python bindings: Assigns bill entries to non-existant invoice. • Bug #731519 - The fix sets the upper limit before it sets the value of the end row spin button. • Bug #733107 - Search for reconcile status doesn't work right. • Bug #733283 - [PATCH] Loss of fractions when importing OFX investment transactions. • Bug #733506 - (ForwadDisableQIF) The forward button is not active even though a file is selected. • Bug #734183 - Set all of the denominators correctly on the currency values. • Bug #736703 - Scheduled transaction are registered without credit/debit. • Bug #732545 - gnucash-2.6.3 segfaults when started. Some other fixes not associated with reported bugs were accomplished: • Add business lot scrubbing to Check & Repair->All/This transaction(s). • Add context to generic translatable string. This was suggested in bug 671615 by Jérôme Rapinat. • Add scrub function to reduce the amount of lot links used. Only lot links between two or more document lots must remain. All lot links between document and payment lots can be scrubbed. • Add some date format checking and make sure generated dates are the correct user selected format, not always locale format. • Allow the ability to skip rows when importing transactions. • Always use the price we display to calculate the current value of an account. • Better period totals formatting in Invoices. • CSV Export: factor out function to generate regular expression. • CSV Import transform macro into function. • Convert ISO-8859-1 account chart templates to UTF-8. • Correct txf output to use a minus sign, rather than parenthesis. • Fix document type dispay for credit notes on owner report. • Fix test-backend-dbi segfault with libdbi-0.9.0. • Handle the case of scrubbing a lot link between two non-document lots. • Make scrub in lot viewer scrub business lots using the new scrub functions. • Move account type checking functions into the engine. • Prevent older gnucash versions from opening a data file if previously unhandled kvps are used. • Python bindings. Add function gncVendorNextID, complementary to gncCustomerNextID. • Re-enable loading and s
Re: GnuCash 2.6.4 released
Russian translations is missibg in the list of updated ones. 29 сент. 2014 г. 1:48 пользователь "John Ralls" написал: > The GnuCash development team proudly announces GnuCash 2.6.4, the fourth > maintenance release in the 2.6-stable series. > > Changes > > Between 2.6.3 and 2.6.4, the following bugfixes were accomplished: > > • Bug #120199 - Incorrect sort order in "Sort by Statement Date". > • Bug #434462 - register color don't work correct with system > theme color. > • Bug #509263 - Since Last Run dialog won't allow resizing of > Status column. > • Bug #610202 - gnucash silently closes when no X11/$DISPLAY is > present. > • Bug #630638 - 'Process payment' should allow to select equity > accounts for payment > • Bug #671615 - French: 'New Customer' button in Find Customer > dialog is translated to 'Nouvel onglet' > • Bug #688965 - Page Up, Page Down keys cause GnuCash to hang. > • Bug #692249 - Add Help button in Custom Reports dialog box, > • Bug #695240 - mortgage wizard empty table. > • Bug #707243 - Hard-coded font colors in account tree? > • Bug #711440 - Tab labels have different background colour than > containing gui element. > • Bug #711567 - Cannot save a custom report if a path contain > diacritic chars > • Bug #719457 - Template for Home Mortgage Loan isn't properly > nested. > • Bug #719457 - Template for Home Mortgage Loan isn't properly > nested. > • Bug #720427 - Review of french account templates > • Bug #720934 - Barcharts with many data points have overlapping > x-axis labels. > • Bug #722140 - Add option to control inclusion of trading > accounts in cash flow report. > • Bug #722200 - configure script does not pick the correct > am_cv_scanf version. > • Bug #723145 - Currency display does not respect locale. > • Bug #723442 - Report Options - Report Name too short. > • Bug #725054 - Re-numbering sub accounts crashes the program. > • Bug #725366 - Formula Parsing Error with Scheduled Mortgage > Transactions > • Bug #726449 - Budget Barchart does not show up if running sum is > selected. > • Bug #726888 - cancel button is available on all pages of > assistant. > • Bug #727130 - Crash when newline in Report Title > • Bug #727338 - Translation and Account file updates for Latvian. > • Bug #728103 - Invoice opened does not contain the Job under > circumstances. > • Bug #728717 - Ubuntu 14.04 - GNUcash crashes on close. > • Bug #728841 - XML backend does not always store KVP slots. > • Bug #729157 - Bill Term discount days are allowed to be more > than due days. > • Bug #729497 - Saved Report Configuration selection window resize. > • Bug #730255 - Python bindings: Assigns bill entries to > non-existant invoice. > • Bug #731519 - The fix sets the upper limit before it sets the > value of the end row spin button. > • Bug #733107 - Search for reconcile status doesn't work right. > • Bug #733283 - [PATCH] Loss of fractions when importing OFX > investment transactions. > • Bug #733506 - (ForwadDisableQIF) The forward button is not > active even though a file is selected. > • Bug #734183 - Set all of the denominators correctly on the > currency values. > • Bug #736703 - Scheduled transaction are registered without > credit/debit. > • Bug #732545 - gnucash-2.6.3 segfaults when started. > Some other fixes not associated with reported bugs were accomplished: > > • Add business lot scrubbing to Check & Repair->All/This > transaction(s). > • Add context to generic translatable string. This was suggested > in bug 671615 by Jérôme Rapinat. > • Add scrub function to reduce the amount of lot links used. Only > lot links between two or more document lots must remain. All lot links > between document and payment lots can be scrubbed. > • Add some date format checking and make sure generated dates are > the correct user selected format, not always locale format. > • Allow the ability to skip rows when importing transactions. > • Always use the price we display to calculate the current value > of an account. > • Better period totals formatting in Invoices. > • CSV Export: factor out function to generate regular expression. > • CSV Import transform macro into function. > • Convert ISO-8859-1 account chart templates to UTF-8. > • Correct txf output to use a minus sign, rather than parenthesis. > • Fix document type dispay for credit notes on owner report. > • Fix test-backend-dbi segfault with libdbi-0.9.0. > • Handle the case of scrubbing a lot link between two non-document > lots. > • Make scrub in lot viewer scrub business lots using the new scrub > functions. > • Move ac
