Am Donnerstag, 5. Juli 2007 16:56 schrieb Derek Atkins:
> >> Following this way of thought I would decide for choice #1, leave
> >> as-is for 2.2.0. What do the other developers say?
> >
> > For better or for worse, we've conditioned users (me included) to
> > expect that they can 1) open GnuCash,
Speaking strictly as a user of GnuCash, I like the current auto-save as
implemented i.e. save-to-working-file; thanks, Christian!
I've never played around with a GnuCash file, decided I didn't like the
changes and closed without saving (but strangely enough, I do that with other
programs), but
Chris Shoemaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[snip]
>> Following this way of thought I would decide for choice #1, leave
>> as-is for 2.2.0. What do the other developers say?
>
> For better or for worse, we've conditioned users (me included) to
> expect that they can 1) open GnuCash, 2) make unde
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 10:44:46AM +0200, Christian Stimming wrote:
> 14:40:57 Hmm, are we going to have a 2.1.6?
> 16:21:25 warlord: wrt 2.1.6, if we plan not to revert the
> auto-save feature, we might want to have another test version iff
> christian wants to extend / improve it if
Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Following this way of thought I would decide for choice #1, leave
> as-is for 2.2.0. What do the other developers say?
I like option 3.
The implemented auto-save doesn't behave in the conventional way (with a
separate "checkpoint" file); it proba
> I'm just saying we developers have to find a decision
> which doesn't necessarily conform with the majority of feedback on our
> mailing lists. Neither we ourselves nor even the users of our mailing
> lists might correspond "the normal user" in a representative way.
Before you claim to m
14:40:57 Hmm, are we going to have a 2.1.6?
16:21:25 warlord: wrt 2.1.6, if we plan not to revert the
auto-save feature, we might want to have another test version iff
christian wants to extend / improve it if we just change the
default to disabled auto-save, then i am fine with no
