2.4.9 release, 2.5.0 plans

[Geert Janssens]

On 19-12-11 12:49, Christian Stimming wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 18. Dezember 2011, 14:23:10 schrieb John Ralls:
>>> The plugin directories for gwenyhwfar are looked up in two ways: Firstly
>>> by using the executable's installation location as a starting point
>>> (using binreloc on Unix and GetModuleFileName() on Windows), assuming
>>> it's installed in some $prefix/bin, and going to $prefix/lib relative
>>> from there. Secondly, on windows the paths from the registry are used,
>>> and on Unix the compile-time paths are used.
>> There are a couple of catches, though: I couldn't make the MinGW/Msys
>> installation described in the Wiki article work (several packages are too
>> old), and so I installed the latest MinGW and turned off the packages that
>> mess with it. I obviously don't want to commit that. If you or Geert have a
>> setup that matches what the buildbot uses, perhaps you could copy the
>> defaults.sh from trunk to the 2.4 branch and give it a try.
> I don't have a local setup that matches, sorry.
Same here. I haven't been doing Windows builds lately. I don't think my 
setup really matches that of the build server either. In any case, I'd 
expect build problems when simply copying defaults.sh from trunk to 2.4. 
Guile was updated from 1.6 to 1.8 and that required patching the build 
scripts and the guile 1.8 sources.
>
>> I wanted to test the AQB setup from the build installation. I guess that
>> won't work without hacking on the registry, eh? How do you test anything in
>> Windows?
> I haven't been testing anything in Windows for quite some time by now.
>
> The aqbanking setup cannot be tested from the build directory, only from the
> installation directory. Once you have run "make install", the command line
> utility "aqbanking-cli" should work, though. If there are no registry keys,
> the plugin directories will be looked up from aqbanking-cli's installation
> prefix. If this is a different prefix from gwenhywfar, it indeed won't work
> and your only way to get this work is to set all the registry keys that we
> already noted in gnucash.iss.
>
>> I don't know about getting a release out in the next week. It doesn't look
>> like anyone else is going to write the "feature table" feature, and since
>> there are a few wrinkles there (starting with I haven't ever studied the
>> xml backend) I don't think I'll be able to get it done this week.
> Yes, it doesn't look like anyone else is planning on writing the "feature
> table". In that case, I'd like to propose to have a 2.4.9 release in any case
> rather soon, and have a 2.4.10 with the "feature table" feature (no pun
> intended) in January or February. We're not in a hurry here, after all.
Agreed.

Geert