Using 2.2.9 vs. 2.3.x

[Rafferty Uy]

You have a point. I haven't tried 2.3.x though. Is it easy to port the data
from 2.2.9 to 2.3.x?


Best regards,

Rafferty D. Uy
Software Engineer (http://www.easesolutions.com)
MBA Candidate 2011 (http://www.mba.nus.edu.sg)


"Be nice to nerds. Chances are you'll end up working for one." ~ Bill Gates


On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 12:00 PM, Paul A. <abrahams at acm.org> wrote:

>
> I know that nothing is guaranteed for the 2.3.x versions, but at the same
> time there are good reasons for running them instead of 2.2.9:
>
> 1. If they don't implode, they presumably work much better.
>
> 2. The more people use 2.3.x (and report any problems), the more reliable
> it
> becomes.
>
> Have there been any reports at all of corrupted backups when running 2.3.x?
> If not, it would seem reasonable to run 2.3.x  as my normal working version
> and revert one level in the unlikely event of a crash.
>
> Is there any information, even just anecdotal, about the incidence of
> crashes in the latest 2.3.x versus 2.2.9?
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/Using-2-2-9-vs-2-3-x-tp2285684p2285684.html
> Sent from the GnuCash - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
>