[GNC-dev] Request of keeping a 2.6 branch still alive (Re: branch-2.6)
christian at cstimming.de
Sun May 27 15:50:00 EDT 2018
I did notice that the 2.6 branch was deleted (meaning: "maint" is now the 3.x
branch), but I didn't understand the reasons and didn't see any discussion of
this decision. I have some requirements which I can meet most easily by just
continuing the 2.6 version of gnucash, but this in turn needed some occasional
commits there. For example, I'm still running Ubuntu 14.04 for reasons beyond
the scope of gnucash, and I haven't been able to build the 3.x branch on that
machine because of missing packages. At the same time the 2.6 branch met all
that I needed for everyday work, so I just stick to this.
Hence, I don't quite understand why there is such a strong requirement to
prohibit specifically any further existence of a 2.6 branch, and why you use
strong language to underline your point of view here. Also, it's a bit
puzzeling to me why you suggest me of all people to "change the name and
artwork" in case of a 2.6 branch - what have I missed here?? Where was the
discussion that led to this decision? Where was the decision process, if this
were the project's decision? Maybe some more liberality for other people and
their different requirements might be more suitable on your side, before
calling other people's requirements a "fantasy".
This particular pull request for the 2.6 branch showed up only one week after
I created that branch. To me, this looks like there are still more people
interested in such a branch. Of course, nothing new will happen there, but the
interest still exists.
For this reason I propose to keep some old 2.6 branch still up and running in
the gnucash repository. I would volunteer to act as an owner of that branch,
in case this is needed, but on the other hand we didn't need any such
designated branch maintainers for the most part. Further voices? objections?
Am Samstag, 26. Mai 2018, 10:50:32 schrieb John Ralls:
> Your "branch-2.6" drew its first PR today, so I've deleted it to avoid any
> further confusion. Please consult with the rest of the team before you do
> anything like that again. If you'd like to maintain a 2.6 branch yourself
> you are of course free to fork GnuCash, though you should change the name
> and artwork to avoid confusion with the main project.
> John Ralls
More information about the gnucash-devel