On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 05:37:55PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>
> > As a side note, corba does have this 'service discovery' feature, this
> > thing where you can ask "who holds the gnucash config data" and there
> > would come this response "oh, machine 10.0.0.1 holds it", so the us
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 02:40:44AM +0200, Thomas Viehmann was heard to remark:
> More or less the combination of both is done. If there is no active
> gconfd, one is initialized from data stored in (a configurable location
> which usually is) $HOME/.gconf. Further instances will than contact this
>
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 12:23:23AM +0200, Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists was heard to
remark:
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, Linas Vepstas wrote:
>
> > It would be seriously cool if gconf was distributed, so that, e.g.
> > when machine 2 shows up on net, its gconf would sync with that from
> > machine1.
On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 12:16:23AM +0200, Tomas Pospisek's Mailing Lists was heard to
remark:
>
> OTOH, as a complete ignorant, I was able to find my way through gnucash
> rather quickly and fix/add what I needed, thanks to modularisation I
> think.
yes, and no, we've tried to make gnucash out o
Hi.
Derek Atkins wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
>>It would be seriously cool if gconf was distributed, so that, e.g.
>>when machine 2 shows up on net, its gconf would sync with that from
>>machine1. After sync machine1 could be shut down, or whatever ...
>>machines could come
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> It would be seriously cool if gconf was distributed, so that, e.g.
> when machine 2 shows up on net, its gconf would sync with that from
> machine1. After sync machine1 could be shut down, or whatever ...
> machines could come & go, join the party & lea
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004, Derek Atkins wrote:
> >> and how scheme is used as an extension/configuration language.
> >
> > Yeah, I guess it didn't quite work out as envisioned.
>
> That's an understatement. The whole modularization project failed
> horrendously and has been the bane of gnucash ever sin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
>> True. I was sort of thinking in terms of "g_object" (or gtk_object)..
>> Which sort of makes some basic level of sense to me.. *shrugs*
>
> Is this an explicit statement of support for g_objects? In the past,
> you've seemed allergic to them, and so
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> It would be seriously cool if gconf was distributed, so that, e.g.
> when machine 2 shows up on net, its gconf would sync with that from
> machine1. After sync machine1 could be shut down, or whatever ...
> machines could come & go, join the party & le
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 02:20:17PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>
> But I see no reason not to combine them..
> Unless there is a strong reason why queriable objects and 'storable'
> objects need to be (or should be) different.
OK.
> >> So what's your conceptual distinction between
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 07:26:56PM +0200, Thomas Viehmann was heard to remark:
> Derek Atkins wrote:
> > show-stopper if you tie a user's gnucash configuration to a single
> > machine. I'd rather keep the existing scheme-based configuration than
> > lose the ability to have the same desktop on mul
Thomas Viehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Derek Atkins wrote:
>> See, this is absolutely a requirement, IMHO. If gconf2 doesn't let us
>> do this then, IMHO, we CANNOT use gconf2. I consider it a
>> show-stopper if you tie a user's gnucash configuration to a single
>> machine. I'd rather ke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> Well, you're the guy who made this distinction when you wrote
> the code way back when ... :)
>
> -- object defines the relationship to the 'backend'.
> -- class defines parameters.
I had no QofClass, only QofObject... "Class" (and "Instance"
were add
Derek Atkins wrote:
> See, this is absolutely a requirement, IMHO. If gconf2 doesn't let us
> do this then, IMHO, we CANNOT use gconf2. I consider it a
> show-stopper if you tie a user's gnucash configuration to a single
> machine. I'd rather keep the existing scheme-based configuration than
> l
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:44:10PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>>
>> > Gnome GConf seems to be the standard gnome way of soring config
>> > entries. I don't quite like the way GConf is currently
>> > implemented, but I'm guessing that it
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:45:37PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
>
> > On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:16:20PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> >> > void qof_class_foreach (QofClassForeachCB, gpointer user_data);
> >>
> >> We already had
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:44:10PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>
> > Gnome GConf seems to be the standard gnome way of soring config
> > entries. I don't quite like the way GConf is currently
> > implemented, but I'm guessing that it should be pretty future-proof,
> > and get improv
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:16:20PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>> > void qof_class_foreach (QofClassForeachCB, gpointer user_data);
>>
>> We already had qof_object_foreach_type(); why do we need a
>> qof_class_foreach()?
>
> I am thinking a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 11:33:46AM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>>
>> Basically, I think we need to re-think the C<->scheme interaction,
>
> I've wanted to change gnucash reports to a completely different
> mechanism, somthing that uses e-g
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 05:12:09PM +0100, Neil Williams was heard to remark:
>
> The final code should open up all sorts of possibilities, like closing books
> easily
I've already got code that closes books; its been checked in and
operational for a while (years?), except that the business clas
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:16:20PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> > void qof_class_foreach (QofClassForeachCB, gpointer user_data);
>
> We already had qof_object_foreach_type(); why do we need a
> qof_class_foreach()?
I am thinking about merging object and class into one thing.
Maybe
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 11:33:46AM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>
> Basically, I think we need to re-think the C<->scheme interaction,
I've wanted to change gnucash reports to a completely different
mechanism, somthing that uses e-guile or the nearly-equivalent
trick I use in gnotime
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
> On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:02:28PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>>
>> The idea here is a general BookMerge, to allow you to combine two
>> books together. This has many purposes:
>
> Ahh, OK, that makes sense. I've sort-of wanted that featu
On Sunday 20 June 2004 4:46, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > I've posted the code as it was this morning (see other message) and I can
> > explain why a GSList of parameter names is sufficient for me and,
> > probably, would be better than a foreach of the entire list for my needs.
>
> Hmm. I've found tha
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 12:02:28PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
>
> The idea here is a general BookMerge, to allow you to combine two
> books together. This has many purposes:
Ahh, OK, that makes sense. I've sort-of wanted that feature for a
while. (well, for gnotime, actually, but
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linas Vepstas) writes:
>> The original scenario involved just adding a single invoice - in that case, I
>
> I haven't yet read the back-emails. If you're working with invoices,
> why would you need to know about all objects or all paramters?
> Don't you already ahve a clear i
On Sunday 20 June 2004 4:28, Neil Williams wrote:
>
> The original scenario involved just adding a single invoice - in that case,
> I only need to work on certain accounts. Sure, when merging a closed book
> into an open book, it'll all come in to play but that may take some time.
i.e. The user ma
On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 04:28:43PM +0100, Neil Williams was heard to remark:
> On Sunday 20 June 2004 4:12, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 04:49:37PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> > > Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > "one can then ask, at run time, wh
On Sunday 20 June 2004 4:12, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 04:49:37PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> > Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > "one can then ask, at run time, what parameters are associated with a
> > > given type, even if those parameters were n
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 04:49:37PM -0400, Derek Atkins was heard to remark:
> Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "one can then ask, at run time, what parameters are associated with a given
> > type, even if those parameters were not known at compile time."
> > src/doc/html/group__Cla
The doxygen docs should be a complete guide:
http://www.codehelp.co.uk/code/group__BookMerge.html
http://www.codehelp.co.uk/code/gncBookMerge_8h.html
http://www.codehelp.co.uk/code/gncBookMerge_8c.html
http://www.codehelp.co.uk/code/gncBookMerge.c
http://www.codehelp.co.uk/code/gncBookMerge.h
http:
31 matches
Mail list logo
