On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Daniel Espinosa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I think I'm the crazy guy trying to re-write GnuCash to use GDA.
>
> Now I'm one of the maintainers of GDA on GObject Introspection and Vala
> bindings support, but patch some things here and there when possible.
>
> May be is
Hi all,
I think I'm the crazy guy trying to re-write GnuCash to use GDA.
Now I'm one of the maintainers of GDA on GObject Introspection and Vala
bindings support, but patch some things here and there when possible.
May be is time you consider to use GDA, it has a current Debian version and
well
Sébastien Villemot writes:
> Concerning the time_t issue, I could carry a Debian-specific patch if
> that change was not modifying the ABI (but I guess it does on 32-bit
> archs). And anyways that would not fix the issue for other GNU/Linux
> distributions. I could however add my voice to convinc
Le samedi 11 janvier 2014 à 15:46 -0800, John Ralls a écrit :
> On Jan 11, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> > Concerning the time_t issue, I could carry a Debian-specific patch if
> > that change was not modifying the ABI (but I guess it does on 32-bit
> > archs). And anyways that wo
On Jan 12, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
>
> ODB looks promising. If distro packagers are willing to package it (Debian's
> Sébastien Villemot
> seemed ok with it already provided it can be packaged) that would be the best
> candidate IMO.
ODB does look interesting. As far as I can
On Jan 12, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
> John,
>
> ODB looks promising. If distro packagers are willing to package it (Debian's
> Sébastien Villemot seemed ok with it already provided it can be packaged)
> that would be the best candidate IMO.
>
> I checked cross-platform avail
John,
ODB looks promising. If distro packagers are willing to package it (Debian's
Sébastien Villemot
seemed ok with it already provided it can be packaged) that would be the best
candidate IMO.
I checked cross-platform availability as well. OS X seems no problem. For
Windows it mentions
Min
On Jan 11, 2014, at 3:08 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Le samedi 11 janvier 2014 à 14:47 -0800, John Ralls a écrit :
>
>>> If you can get libdbi to actually fix the time_t issue (and any other
>>> issues that we might be having) that would be great and obviate the need
>>> to fork the code.
Le samedi 11 janvier 2014 à 14:47 -0800, John Ralls a écrit :
> > If you can get libdbi to actually fix the time_t issue (and any other
> > issues that we might be having) that would be great and obviate the need
> > to fork the code. Alas, right now they seem unwilling to acknowledge the
> > exi
On Jan 11, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The problem is rather the duplicate codebase: from the point of view of
>> the distribution (Debian) as a whole, it really means that there would
>> be two copies of libdbi in it, and it is bad for the same reasons that
>> you don't wa
Hi,
> The problem is rather the duplicate codebase: from the point of view of
> the distribution (Debian) as a whole, it really means that there would
> be two copies of libdbi in it, and it is bad for the same reasons that
> you don't want two almost identical copies of a file in a single project
Le samedi 11 janvier 2014 à 13:51 -0800, John Ralls a écrit :
> That said, what I proposed was to fork libdbi or SOCI *into gnucash*. It
> would become part of the GnuCash source code and would cause you no more
> trouble than the other bits of GnuCash lifted from other projects like LibQOF
> o
On Jan 11, 2014, at 1:30 PM, Sébastien Villemot wrote:
> Le samedi 11 janvier 2014 à 10:53 -0800, John Ralls a écrit :
>
>> Rather than depending on one of these libraries, we could fork one into our
>> own repository; if we did that with libdbi, we could even fix the time_t
>> problem.
>
>
Le samedi 11 janvier 2014 à 10:53 -0800, John Ralls a écrit :
> Rather than depending on one of these libraries, we could fork one into our
> own repository; if we did that with libdbi, we could even fix the time_t
> problem.
Please don't do that, private forks are a real pain for the free
soft
On Jan 11, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Phil Longstaff wrote:
> When I first started the sql backend, I worked with gnome-db
> (http://www.gnome-db.org/) aka libgda. This is a gobject-based database
> access technology. I started working with version 3.X and ran into some bugs
> and missing capabilit
I'd like to replace libdbi because they refused to change their use of time_t
to avoid the 2038 bug, insisting that since *BSD use a 64-bit time_t, it's not
a problem [1]. Furthermore, transactions are supported only in their new 0.9.0
version which isn't available yet in the major distros.
Unf
16 matches
Mail list logo
