2.1.x and allow_file_incompatability

[Josh Sled]

On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 14:27 +0200, Christian Stimming wrote:
> Can you define again "backward compatible"? Does that mean with your proposed 
> change, a 2.1.2-saved file cannot be read by 2.0.x as long as 1. it contains 
> scheduled transactions, and 2. the user doesn't manually set this key the 
> other way round? 

Right now, both (1) and (2) must be true.  I'm proposing changing it so
only (1) needs to be true.

That is: the default for 2.2 will be to create files that 2.0 cannot
read.


> Which version would be the earliest gnucash version that can 
> read the new file?

2.1.0.  (Well, SVN after ~Feb 18th.)


> Also, does that mean we've already agreed that a 2.2.0-saved data file cannot 
> be read by 2.0.x?

I've heard no objection to [1], nor was there any noise after [2].


A third option is to retain the FreqSpec code and write both FreqSpec
and Recurrence code for at least 1 release.  The file would still not
trivially backward compatible, but would be so with the simple removal
of the <gnc:recurrence> XML element.  Of course, then there's the minor
problem of periods which aren't possible to express in FreqSpec.


[1] http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/2007-February/019825.html
[2] http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/2007-February/019966.html

-- 
...jsled
http://asynchronous.org/ - a=jsled;b=asynchronous.org; echo ${a}@${b}
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20070501/400b4cdd/attachment.bin