[GNC] Ubuntu PPAs (Launchpad)

[Jon Schewe]

I understand fewer versions. As far as current version of Ubuntu, I'd
suggest that if you are going to support packages you track the latest
LTS (Long Term Support), that would be 24.04. There is a new LTS every
2 years. Using non-LTS versions (25.04) is not necessarily a good idea
for users that want a stable system.

Personally I run the flatpaks on Ubuntu. However one issue I've had is
using the python API. I have not found a way to use the API with only
the flatpak installed. I've been using the old version of the gnucash
python bindings that is distributed with Ubuntu 24.04 and have gotten
away with it as it appears that the file format hasn't changed much
since then. Ideally I'd like to be able to figure out how to use the
python API with flatpak, then we wouldn't need distribution-specific
packages. Is there a way to have the python API published on PyPi? Then
we could install the version of the API needed that matches the flapak
that I have installed.



On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 16:34 -0700, Brad Morrison wrote:
> Hi Bruce, John, & others, 
> 
> Interesting topic! 
> 
> The fewer versions of GNUCash there are, the less work it is for
> developers to reproduce issues AKA limiting possibilities reduces the
> work involved in trying to reproduce & understand issues. 
> 
> Repology seems to list 256 various Linux distro versions that use
> many
> different versions of GNUCash in their repositories -
> https://repology.org/project/gnucash/versions 
> 
> I can think of a few ways to approach this: 
> 
> 1. Are there specific reasons why some developers/users would still
> be
> using Ubuntu 22.04? It looks like the current version of Ubuntu is
> 25.04
> - https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntu 
> 
> If there was a financial cost to upgrading the operating system,
> whether
> from having to purchase the current version of Windows or MacOS or
> having to purchase new(er) hardware, that's totally valid.  
> 
> For operating systems like Ubuntu & other free Linux distros
> (https://distrowatch.com/), if someone's existing hardware supports
> the
> current version, why not spend the few hours upgrading the OS? 
> 
> 2. It looks like it is possible to run Flatpaks on Ubuntu & here are
> the
> setup instructions - https://flatpak.org/setup/Ubuntu &
> https://flathub.org/setup/Ubuntu 
> 
> 3. Here is the Flathub page for the GNUCash flatpak -
> https://flathub.org/apps/org.gnucash.GnuCash 
> 
> Instead of reducing the workload for GNUCash developers, increasing
> the
> options for supporting the project include: 
> 
> Financial contributions - https://www.gnucash.org/donate.phtml  
> 
> Nonfinancial contributions -
> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Contributing_to_GnuCash (more geared
> towards users) & https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/WishList (more for
> developers) 
> 
> ---
> Thanks, 
> 
> Brad - https://www.facebook.com/brad.morrison.12327/ &
> https://nextdoor.com/profile/01mP46jj8KCzj3sP4 &
> https://norcal.social/@BradMorrison 
> 
> On 2025-05-20 14:30, Bruce Schuck wrote:
> 
> > On 5/20/25 1:59 PM, John Ralls wrote:
> > 
> > An alternative for those using older Ubuntu releases
> 
> > 5.11 is as up to date as it gets, that's the current release.
> 
> I noted "older Ubuntu releases" for those such as me on Ubuntu 22.04
> LTS. I usually upgrade every other LTS, so I skipped 24.04 and will
> update my OS sometime after 26.04LTS is released next April.
> 
> If I want to run 5.11 on my system I would need to either use a
> flatpack
> or compile 5.11 myself. Either is relatively simple for me, as I have
> experimented on virtual systems. But for Ubuntu 22.04, the most
> recent
> GC release via standard Ubuntu/Canonical repo is 4.8.
> 
> I started thinking about PPAs when a couple reported YahooJSON issues
> that were recently fixed. Both were using older Ubuntu releases (I
> think
> 20.04 and 22.04) and a 5.x GC flatpack. Not sure why neither of them
> didn't just get the latest flatpack at first.
> 
> Yes, I know Ubuntu uses Debian packages. I build binary packages at
> work
> for a couple in-house applications that we deploy using Ansible or
> SaltStack. But PPAs don't allow one to directly upload binary
> packages.
> 
> > I won't object if someone is willing to step up and be the
> > "official" PPA-maker *provided* that that someone *commits* to
> > doing
> > it reliably for every release until they find somebody to replace
> > them.
> 
> I assuumed that at least part of the reason for not using PPA was
> workload. And from my playing around, building a flatpack (not
> installing) is easier than preparing and building a PPA source
> package.
> But then I've just started playing with creating my own.
> 
> Thanks for the info.
> 
> Bruce S.
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> 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.