2.3.4 xml files cannot be opened by 2.2.x anymore (?) (Re: Db structure)

[Christian Stimming]

Am Freitag, 21. August 2009 18:03 schrieb Phil Longstaff:
> I think I was moving too quickly and didn't stop to really read what you
> wrote.  I went on what I thought you said.  I'll  go back and re-read what
> you wrote.

Ok, it's fine now. I've already committed the revert (r18268); I think the 
discussion also didn't state clearly enough that we shouldn't add new XML 
tags because of the picky xml reader implementation. Nevermind, that's what 
unstable releases are for.

However, this means our released version 2.3.4 produces XML files which cannot 
be read by any version before that, including any 2.2.x, or 2.3.0 up to 
2.3.2. This state shouldn't last very long. I'd propose to release yet 
another version (2.3.5 in this case) relatively soon, say in 1-2 weeks but 
for sure not later than that. (I'll comment on the string freeze issue in the 
other thread.)

Regards,

Christian

>
> Rather than reading those specific tags, how about, for any object, unknown
> tags are read as slots.  The values could either always be stored as
> strings, or some intelligence could be used (numeric values stored as int
> or double, "F", "T", "true", "false" stored as boolean, string of 32 hex
> chars stored as guid).
>
> Phil
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Derek Atkins <warlord at MIT.EDU>
> To: Christian Stimming <stimming at tuhh.de>
> Cc: gnucash-devel <gnucash-devel at lists.gnucash.org>
> Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 11:51:41 AM
> Subject: Re: 2.3.4 xml files cannot be opened by 2.2.x anymore (?) (Re: Db
> structure)
>
> Christian Stimming <stimming at tuhh.de> writes:
> > The use case for loading a 2.3 or 2.4 file into 2.2 again is rather
> > common: Someone runs the new version for testing and in order to do
> > thorough testing he uses his live data, but then for whatever reason
> > doesn't like the current state of the new version and prefers to
> > continue his daily work in the previous version.
> >
> > Does anyone see the same issues? How are we going to deal with this?
>
> IMHO we should leaving in the reading of these new tags but turn off the
> 'writing' of these tags in 2.3/2.4...   Which is what I suggested but
> Phil ignored me.
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Christian
>
> -derek