Wishes to the new G-Wrap maintainer?

Linas Vepstas linas at linas.org
Wed Jul 14 11:22:32 EDT 2004

On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 08:54:22PM +0200, Andreas Rottmann was heard to remark:
> OK, but I think as long as you are consistent, it's IMHO no problem to
> break API on minor version numbers :-p

What I really want to do is to say "thank you for taking over 
maintainership, and let us all wish for a bright and happy future."
But you just won't let me, will you?

I really just don't get it.  What's wrong with just incrementing
the major version number every time you do this? So what if we get
to version 59.1 ?  What's wrong with that, as compared to a version 
5.9.1 that's backwards-incompatbible with version 5.8.0, which 
will mess everyone up?

Look, I can't stop you from doing what you really want to do.
But there are tens of thousands of gnucash users and a sizable
fraction of them keep getting smashed by versioning problems.  
This is bad for gnucash and its bad for Linux in general.  You
can do whatever you want, but to echo Derek's sentiments, it 
might be best to cut our losses right now, fold the existing 
g-wrap into gnucash, and avoid these future breakages before 
they occur.


pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <linas at linas.org>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list