Open ccdunder opened 2 weeks ago
The statement refers to the fact that beangulp
does not require Beancount 3.0. beangulp
requires importers implementing either the beangulp.importer.Importer
ABC or that are subclasses of beangulp.importer.ImporterProtocol
. The latter is the same as beancount.ingest.ImporterProtocol
just with a different import path. Supporting subclasses of beancount.ingest.ImporterProtocol
when executed with Beancount 2.3 is possible, however no one contributed a patch to make this possible.
Ah, that makes sense. Thank you!
So folks would be open to PRs to make beangulp importers work in beancount 2.3 vice versa?
I think this would be a very useful change. I see a lot of large beancount projects struggling to move to 3.0 because it's a breaking change. Making importers forward and backward compatible would make incremental upgrades possible (both within an individual codebase and across dependent codebases).
So folks would be open to PRs to make beangulp importers work in beancount 2.3 vice versa?
Making importers using beangulp
interfaces work in Beancount 2.3 yuo would need to patch Beancount. The Beancount 2.3 branch will receive only very important bugfixes: we do not have the resources to tend to it.
Patches to make importers using the beancount.ingest.ImporterProtocol
interface work in beangulp
are welcome.
Hi, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills; perhaps I'm missing something.
The README states:
But
beangulp.importer.Importer
andbeancount.ingest.importer.ImporterProtocol
don't match. They're very close, but there are slight differences in most methods such that a wrapper is required. For now I'm wrapping this, but it seems like I shouldn't have to and makes me think I'm missing something.What am I missing? In what sense is this compatible with Beancount 2.3? Is the API mismatch intentional?
Thanks in advance for your help.