G-Wrap, helping out on the G2 port

[Andreas Rottmann]

linas at linas.org (Linas Vepstas) writes:

> On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 10:54:10PM +0100, Andreas Rottmann was heard to remark:
>> My question now is: what plans do the GnuCash developers have
>> regarding the Guile bindings? I think it the there are two
>
> I can't comment on most of your email, because I almost certainly
> won't be doing the port myself; 
>
Just to get an idea, so I can take that into account in my development
plans: what is the expected timeframe (only very roughly) when the
Gnome2 version will be released to "the general public"?

> however, two small comments: 
>
> -- please increment the version number correctly when making
>    incompatible changes.  g-wrap 1.3.4 is fundametnally 
>    incompatible with 1.3.1 but one would never have guessed by 
>    looking at the version number.  This made debugging a lot 
>    harder than it should have been.
>
Rob is working (are you, Rob? *hinthint* ;-)) currently on releasing
1.4, which will mostly be 1.3.4 + minor changes. G-Wrap will then
follow the Linux version number scheme, i.e. 1.5 will become the
unstable series, until "stabled" as 1.6.

I don't have currently a real plan for what will come in 1.6; most
probably 1.6 will be mostly source-compatible to 1.4, but excluding
the GLib bindings and having a few new features. 1.8 (or 2.0, since
that is a really major change) will base upon my TNG work; at least
this is my rough development plan.

> -- I'm concerned about making gnucash depend on *two* packages
>    instead of one, which is what it sounds like you are describing.
>    The concern is that Guile-GObject might be poorly maintained
>    or might go out with wacky version numbers and bugs, leaving 
>    us once again scratching our heads as to why a minor upgrade 
>    broke something somewhere for thousands of users.
>
I did expect this ;). However, Guile-GObject will most probably join
the Gnome Platform Bindings[0] for GNOME 2.8, and then we'll have
strict requirements[1] on both release schedule and API stability.

> One of the saddest, most annoying aspects of having used 
> scheme/guile in general is how minor version changes in these 
> packages managed to induce breakage in gnucash.  
>
I can imagine that. Guile itself really sucks a bit in this respect,
IMHO. However, I am aware that GnuCash is a big package and has lots
of users, and will keep that in the back of my head in my involvement
in G-Wrap and Guile-GObject.

[0] http://www.gnome.org/start/2.5/bindings/
[1] http://developer.gnome.org/dotplan/bindings/rules.html

Andy
-- 
Andreas Rottmann         | Rotty at ICQ      | 118634484 at ICQ | a.rottmann at gmx.at
http://yi.org/rotty      | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint              | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219  F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62

Make free software, not war!