[arch-dev-public] New extra package: gnucash
I said I was going to do this ages ago, due to the weirdness that is goffice, and the fact that I "maintain" both goffice and gnumeric already - does anyone take issue with pulling gnucash into [extra]?
Tuesday 08 January 2008, Aaron Griffin wrote: | I said I was going to do this ages ago, due to the weirdness that | is goffice, and the fact that I "maintain" both goffice and | gnumeric already - does anyone take issue with pulling gnucash | into [extra]? gnucash is now gtk2, right? if its not a pain to build (i remember early versions of it was) and it is a living project, then its only an enrichment to cover also this kind of tools with it. i back up your decision on this, feel free to take it to extra. - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><
On Jan 8, 2008 3:27 AM, Damir Perisa <damir.perisa@solnet.ch> wrote:
Tuesday 08 January 2008, Aaron Griffin wrote: | I said I was going to do this ages ago, due to the weirdness that | is goffice, and the fact that I "maintain" both goffice and | gnumeric already - does anyone take issue with pulling gnucash | into [extra]?
gnucash is now gtk2, right? if its not a pain to build (i remember early versions of it was) and it is a living project, then its only an enrichment to cover also this kind of tools with it.
i back up your decision on this, feel free to take it to extra.
+1
On Jan 8, 2008 1:09 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I said I was going to do this ages ago, due to the weirdness that is goffice, and the fact that I "maintain" both goffice and gnumeric already - does anyone take issue with pulling gnucash into [extra]?
The project seems alive and active, so no objection from me too Varun
Just putting this in the mailman history 8) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mark Schneider <queueram@gmail.com> On Jan 8, 2008 1:39 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
I said I was going to do this ages ago, due to the weirdness that is goffice, and the fact that I "maintain" both goffice and gnumeric already - does anyone take issue with pulling gnucash into [extra]?
Aaron, I am the current maintainer of the gnucash package in AUR. I was wondering, if it is being pulled into extra, would you become the new maintainer? Also, i would like to warn you about a couple of things: 1. gnucash depends on slib, which is in community currently 2. we have been having issues compiling gnucash with the newer versions of slib. I currently can still only build it with slib-3a1. Mainly, it's been issues with relocating files in the slib package and relocating/renaming functions. 3. gnucash depends on aqbanking which is also in community (and which we are also currently having runtime problems with) 4. I was waiting for the next release for this, but the scrollkeeper dep has been replaced by rarian 5. gnucash 2.2.3 was released today with some bug fixes If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Regards, Mark
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 10:54 -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
4. I was waiting for the next release for this, but the scrollkeeper dep has been replaced by rarian
Ah, you mean removal of scrollkeeper-update statements from the .install file, removing scrollkeeper/rarian from dependencies and adding gnome-doc-utils>=0.12.0 to makedepends ;) There's no reason to have rarian installed if you don't have a help viewer installed. Currently, yelp is the only scrollkeeper help viewer and depends on rarian.
On Jan 9, 2008 10:54 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Aaron,
I am the current maintainer of the gnucash package in AUR. I was wondering, if it is being pulled into extra, would you become the new maintainer? Also, i would like to warn you about a couple of things:
Yes, but I'm more than willing to work with you as I don't use gnucash as much as some of the online financial utilities, but it depends on goffice, and I already maintain gnumeric because goffice is such a pain in the ass. I also feel that gnucash is a worthy package to be supported by Arch in the official repos, so that's part of the rationale here. I also feel like I would use it more were it a package I was responsible for (so there's a subtle selfish reason in here, heh)
1. gnucash depends on slib, which is in community currently 3. gnucash depends on aqbanking which is also in community (and which we are also currently having runtime problems with)
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly me. So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
1. gnucash depends on slib, which is in community currently 3. gnucash depends on aqbanking which is also in community (and which we are also currently having runtime problems with)
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly me.
So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
Fine by me. Dale
On 1/9/08, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 10:54 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Aaron,
I am the current maintainer of the gnucash package in AUR. I was wondering, if it is being pulled into extra, would you become the new maintainer? Also, i would like to warn you about a couple of things:
Yes, but I'm more than willing to work with you as I don't use gnucash as much as some of the online financial utilities, but it depends on goffice, and I already maintain gnumeric because goffice is such a pain in the ass.
I also feel that gnucash is a worthy package to be supported by Arch in the official repos, so that's part of the rationale here. I also feel like I would use it more were it a package I was responsible for (so there's a subtle selfish reason in here, heh)
1. gnucash depends on slib, which is in community currently 3. gnucash depends on aqbanking which is also in community (and which we are also currently having runtime problems with)
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly me.
So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
As apposed to the normal tack of not saying anything when I have no negative feedback, I am going to try yielding some affirmative feedback more regularly. So here it is. I have no problem with pulling in those deps to get gnucash into the repos. gnucash seems like something quite a few people would use, even if I don't.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 11:01:53AM -0600, Aaron Griffin wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 10:54 AM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Aaron,
I am the current maintainer of the gnucash package in AUR. I was wondering, if it is being pulled into extra, would you become the new maintainer? Also, i would like to warn you about a couple of things:
Yes, but I'm more than willing to work with you as I don't use gnucash as much as some of the online financial utilities, but it depends on goffice, and I already maintain gnumeric because goffice is such a pain in the ass.
I also feel that gnucash is a worthy package to be supported by Arch in the official repos, so that's part of the rationale here. I also feel like I would use it more were it a package I was responsible for (so there's a subtle selfish reason in here, heh)
1. gnucash depends on slib, which is in community currently 3. gnucash depends on aqbanking which is also in community (and which we are also currently having runtime problems with)
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly me.
So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
Yes. Jason
On Jan 9, 2008 10:31 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly me.
So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
slib depends on guile, so thats fine by me. But aqbanking depends upon -> 'gwenhywfar' 'ktoblzcheck' 'libofx' .... and all these packages are in community So to bring in gnucash, we need 5 other packages bought into extra. Sorry I'll have to withdraw the +1 Aaron, I'd rather this one stays in community. Varun
On Jan 9, 2008 12:54 PM, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 10:31 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly
me.
So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
slib depends on guile, so thats fine by me.
But aqbanking depends upon -> 'gwenhywfar' 'ktoblzcheck' 'libofx' .... and all these packages are in community
Is aqbanking a hard or soft dep? ie. if we compile gnucash with aqbanking support, will it run if aqbanking is not installed? Optionally, we can just remove the --enable-aqbanking configure flag, and we win.
2008/1/9, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64@gmail.com>:
On Jan 9, 2008 10:31 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
Ah good catch, I was not aware of these two deps not being in extra. Silly
me.
So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is this still acceptable?
slib depends on guile, so thats fine by me.
But aqbanking depends upon -> 'gwenhywfar' 'ktoblzcheck' 'libofx' .... and all these packages are in community
So to bring in gnucash, we need 5 other packages bought into extra. Sorry I'll have to withdraw the +1 Aaron, I'd rather this one stays in community.
Varun
I don't have anything against gnucash but many dependencies scare me. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
On Jan 9, 2008 11:54 AM, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64@gmail.com> wrote:
But aqbanking depends upon -> 'gwenhywfar' 'ktoblzcheck' 'libofx' .... and all these packages are in community
So to bring in gnucash, we need 5 other packages bought into extra. Sorry I'll have to withdraw the +1 Aaron, I'd rather this one stays in community.
Oh man, all of the sudden this is getting scary. As Travis mentioned, is there a big deal with leaving off the aqbanking support? Or should we leave it in unsupported where it is now?
2008/1/9, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com>:
On Jan 9, 2008 11:54 AM, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64@gmail.com> wrote:
But aqbanking depends upon -> 'gwenhywfar' 'ktoblzcheck' 'libofx' .... and all these packages are in community
So to bring in gnucash, we need 5 other packages bought into extra. Sorry I'll have to withdraw the +1 Aaron, I'd rather this one stays in community.
Oh man, all of the sudden this is getting scary. As Travis mentioned, is there a big deal with leaving off the aqbanking support? Or should we leave it in unsupported where it is now?
I don't use gnucash (yet?) and thus don't know how important is aqbanking support. If it's not and dependency list will be much lower without it - extra is ok, if it's important, then leaving gnucash in unsupported (or moving to community?) would be better, I guess. -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич)
On Jan 9, 2008 11:36 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 11:54 AM, Varun Acharya <ganja.guru.x64@gmail.com> wrote:
But aqbanking depends upon -> 'gwenhywfar' 'ktoblzcheck' 'libofx' .... and all these packages are in community
So to bring in gnucash, we need 5 other packages bought into extra. Sorry I'll have to withdraw the +1 Aaron, I'd rather this one stays in community.
Oh man, all of the sudden this is getting scary. As Travis mentioned, is there a big deal with leaving off the aqbanking support? Or should we leave it in unsupported where it is now?
Why not ask the AUR maintainer?
Wednesday 09 January 2008, Aaron Griffin wrote: | So guys: adding gnucash to extra would pull in these two deps. Is | this still acceptable? yes it is. (they are being maintained) - D -- .·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´ ° ° ° ° ° ° ><((((º> ° ° ° ° ° <º)))>< <º)))><
participants (9)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dale Blount
-
Damir Perisa
-
eliott
-
Jan de Groot
-
Jason Chu
-
Roman Kyrylych
-
Travis Willard
-
Varun Acharya