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