[GNC] GnuCash 5.4 Repackaged

Sat Sep 30 05:52:29 EDT 2023

On 9/30/23 12:20 AM, Brad Morrison wrote:
> I tried to look at the bug report cited below 
> (https://bugs.gnucash.org/show_bug.cgi?id=799092), but GnuCash seems to 
> use BugZilla to manage the bug reports. I have a BugZilla account for 
> contributions I have tried to add to Mozilla products (Firefox & 
> Thunderbird), but that BugZilla account does not work in the GnuCash 
> version of BugZilla and I was unable to log in 
> (https://bugs.gnucash.org/show_bug.cgi?id=799092&GoAheadAndLogIn=1). The 
> Bugzilla websites/URLs are also setup differently for GnuCash & Mozilla.

Just because it has 'zilla' in the name doesn't mean it is associated 
with the Mozilla Foundation or any of their websites.

It is just a bug tracking app that runs on a server. You could run your 
own for your own projects. There isn't just one 'Bugzilla' site. (well, 
there's the one for the Bugzilla project itself I guess...)

Thus, there is no reason to expect that a login to the bug tracker 
(using the Bugzilla software) that Mozilla uses, would work on a bug 
tracker for an entirely different project. (yes, the Gnome bug tracker, 
no longer using the Bugzilla software, does track many projects under 
its umbrella, and GnuCash used to be one of them, but that changed when 
Gnome moved to a different system)

> I then tried to use my GnuCash mailing list account 
> (https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists & 
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo) and was also not able to log 
> in to GnuCash's version of BugZilla 
> (https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Bugzilla & 
> https://bugs.gnucash.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=%E2%88%82Bugzilla).

That's for a separate app/service. (Mailman) Why would you think it 
would work for the bug tracker?

There is also a wiki and it has its own separate login. (as does the 
code server)

I suppose you could make them all the same user/e-mail and password 
though if you like, but such practice is usually not encouraged for 
security purposes for any two sites.

> GnuCash still uses Mailman 2.1.29 
> (https://www.gnu.org/software/mailman/index.html), which looks like it 
> was released in July 2018 (http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/mailman/).

True. And I think there are some issues with it. But there are some 
reasons why the upgrade to the 3.x series has not happened. I don't 
recall them specifically. Perhaps the person in charge of that server 
could shed some light on it, but I'm pretty that has already been 
covered on this very list, so maybe do a search here to find that thread 
or threads.

> I then tried to log in to Mozilla's version of BugZilla 
> (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/home) and was able to successfully 
> (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/user_profile?user_id=713226), but that log 
> in did not carry over to GnuCash's version of BugZilla.

See above.

> I am still not logged in and I would like to have no more than 1 account 
> per software application that I use.
> 
> So, it would be nice if GnuCash could integrate the various online 
> account systems that it uses (Mailman, BugZilla, whatever else) so that 
> users would only have to have 1 log in for all of GnuCash. That is still 
> way more decentralized that having a single Apple, Google, or Microsoft 
> login that applies to dozens (hundreds?) of different websites.

That is a taller order and a bigger ask than you might imagine. Each of 
this list, the wiki, the bug tracker, and code, all run on separate 
server instances. They all have their own user databases. You comment on 
the complexity and options concerning the app itself below, yet you 
think the devs have time to devote to a centralized login server so you 
don't have to maintain separate accounts yourself? (like you do for 
everything else under the sun)

May I suggest a password manager? (Since you're using Mint, it has its 
own Keychain, and the same goes for Firefox. Does that integrate with 
the system keychain yet?)

> I use Linux Mint 21.2 (https://linuxmint.com/edition.php?id=305). LM 
> 21.2 (https://linuxmint.com/rel_victoria_cinnamon.php) is based on 
> Ubuntu 22.04 "Jammy Jellyfish" 
> (https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/jammy-jellyfish-release-notes/24668). In 
> the LM Software Manager, there are 2 options for GnuCash, the "System 
> Package" option lists version "1:4.8-1build2" & the "Flatpak (Flathub)" 
> option lists version "5.4+ (Flathub 5.4.1)." That basically matches with 
> what is listed on Repology for GnuCash 
> (https://repology.org/project/gnucash/versions - GNU version 4.8 for 
> Ubuntu 22.04).

Each distro packages the most recent version of GnuCash at the time of 
the release. Since you are not on a rolling release distro, that version 
is 'frozen'. You may see a newer version if you enable a backports 
repository. (does Mint have that similar to Ubuntu?)

Otherwise, if you want a newer, or the newest version on Linux, your 
only other options are:

1. Build from source
2. Flatpak

> LM 21.2 is the most current version of Linux Mint 
> (https://linuxmint.com/download_all.php), but Repology lists the 
> repository for Ubuntu 22.04 as having 17,168 out of 35,549 packages 
> outdated (https://repology.org/repository/ubuntu_22_04).

I'm not sure how this is relevant to GnuCash.

Besides, that's not scary or even uncommon. Go do the same for the 
previous version of Debian!

Ubuntu 22.04 is an LTS. It will get minimum 5 years of support. (with 
options for 10 years) 23.10 is due out soon. That's 3 versions of the OS 
later. Of course half the packages of 22.04 are out of date compared to 
bleeding edge. (even 23.10 not out yet has 'out of date' packages 
already) So what?

> The GnuCash download page (https://www.gnucash.org/download.phtml) lists 
> plenty of stable releases for Windows, Mac, & various Linux distros. 
> There seem to be 9,557 versions of GnuCash listed on the SourceForge 
> download page (https://sourceforge.net/projects/gnucash/files/).

Really? I guess since the project is over 20 years old, and there are at 
least now, 4 regular releases a year (plus one or two emergency snap 
fixes some years) and each one of those now covers 3 architectures, plus 
source code, and each one those consists of the app and two 'help' 
documents, I guess 9,557 sounds about right. But that would be the 
entire history of the project. (on Sourceforge)

Again, why does this matter? It isn't like you need to worry about any 
except the latest, or whatever version you are currently running. (in 
which case, that would be none, as you'd just stick with what you have)

> Stan's GnuCash email name lists him as using GnuCash 4.14, so I'm not 
> sure if he is actually using 5.4 or 5.4.1 - ?

Some folks are still using (or were until recently) the 2.6, and even 
the 2.4 version!

I'm sure plenty of folks are still in the 3.x and 4.x series due to the 
very issue with package freezing I noted above - anyone on an LTS distro 
who is happy with their version and doesn't want to build, or use 
flatpak, and doesn't have access to a backport, is effectively frozen at 
that version until they upgrade their OS because their distro's repo is 
frozen - some folks consider that stability a positive thing.

I'm not sure why it matters to you what version other people are using. 
How is that relevant to how the app works or doesn't for you?

> Christopher Lam is linking to the index of 32 bit builds for Windows 
> (https://code.gnucash.org/builds/win32/stable/), I am surprised that 
> GnuCash still releases & supports/maintains 32 bit versions for Windows - !

It works. Windows doesn't complain.

With the exception of MacOS, I don't think GnuCash specifically targets 
any special 64-bit functionality and even then, as I understand it, that 
is just window dressing as MacOS would otherwise refuse the install, but 
GnuCash should still be able to work on old 32-bit systems like Leopard 
or Snow Leopard (which depending on the hardware might be a hybrid 32/64 
system)

> At the bottom of the GnuCash homepage 
> (https://www.gnucash.org/index.phtml), it still lists that GnuCash 4.0 
> has been released (https://www.gnucash.org/new_features-4.0.phtml).

That's an old 'News' item, which I guess could be updated. I'm not sure 
why the regular release announcements don't show up there instead.

Maybe once you figure out Bugzilla, you can see if someone filed a bug 
on it. (yes, you can file bugs about the website)

> OK, so I say all of that because my main point is that that is too much 
> to keep track of.

Then don't. You don't need to. Install and run whatever version you 
want. Participate in the list or don't.

I don't know how GnuCash can be reasonably expected to
> accurately manage and/or maintain that many different options for that 
> many different operating systems.

There are 4 'builds' per release:

1. Source
2. Windows
3. Mac
4. Flatpak

The devs do not maintain the individual OS repo versions. That is 
handled by the respective package managers for GnuCash on that OS.

So it isn't as bad as you think. (even that is still lots of work!)

But the devs have earned immortality for sure.

There seems to be so much effort put
> on adding to GnuCash and not reducing the number of options with the 
> goal of reducing the amount of maintenance and work required to use 
> GnuCash. While I am sure that there are plenty of reasons for GnuCash 
> doing things this way, it seems to be a real drag on the project's success.

I'm not sure how'd you could make that assessment if you haven't been 
around for apparently quite some time.

I could be mistaken, but watching things over the years, and 
participating to the best of my schedule and ability, I'd say vastly 
more work has gone into improving the software, and its architecture 
than new features. (though there certainly have been some really nice 
ones in the last several years)

The point of that work, is to make it easier to maintain, and more 
structured. (see Roadmap on the wiki if you are curious)

Any drag isn't from improvements or additions, but from the coding and 
design that needs to be 'modernized' and 'organized', and the fact that 
the dev team is really really few in number, and they work seemingly 
without sleep, and they've been doing this for well over 1 decade, some 
of them more than 2.

And they haven't made such progress by using the 'drive by' approach.

Regards,
Adrien