In D12979#265515, @wojnilowicz wrote:

So how did those changes travelled to the repository? Through conventional post in an envelope on a diskette? :)

Are you seriously questioning that people in distributed teams worked on software before the internet? I certainly remember passing sourcecode around on floppy disks and CDs myself. This was a pain in the neck and I'm sort of jealous of you if you didn't have to go through that. Just because you didn't does not mean noone did, though.

In D12979#265252, @wojnilowicz wrote:

[...] That's the "metric" (as you called it) you can apply only to names who had an account in CVS. They've contributed directly through CVS, so they can be identified by CVS logs. [...]

Another problematic example is kmymoney/mymoney/mymoneyinstitution.cpp where you removed Michael Edwardes. The first comment for this file in CVS is by Thomas and says "[...] renamed MyMoneyBank to MyMoneyInstitution, also all references[...]".
When you look into the 0.3.1 release on the sourceforge page that Jack linked, you'll find that the original mymoneybank.cpp does only list Michael in the header - he seems to be a legit contributor to this file if not the initial author.
This also kind of disproves your "Let's be real, if someone had an account in cvs for commiting code, then he wouldn't ask someone else for commiting it for them. You can see proofs of any work on cvs stats, mailing list and logs, that I linked above." argument in D12836.

In D12979#265130, @wojnilowicz wrote:

The topic seems a little bit hot and I think because of some misconceptions going on here:

1. people added their names to the headers either by themselves or asking someone else to add it for them,
2. people contributed to the files,

Wow. Don't you think that "kicking somebody off the project" seems a little harsh? In the end, those people claimed their authorship through adding their names to the headers (and that's what -when push comes to shove- really matters), not through comments on a mailing list or cvs commits. To me, removing someone who did potentially contribute (and, honestly speaking, why would someone add him/herself to the headers of the source files if they didn't?) in any form (technically this could have been verbally expressed advice, review or anything that happened offline before checking the code in) is (in lack of better words) morally questionable and, at the very least, just rude. How would you feel if in a year or two someone removes your name arguing that he or she doesn't see you as a valid author/contributor because of some kind of self defined metric (cvs commits, in this case)? In your opinion - what is the improvement (to the code, the application, the project, or anything) or gain resulting from removing those people?

Custom icons for accounts
don't store icons in database as discussed in review.

add color coding of pos/neg amounts for 'posted value' column

add color coding of pos/neg amounts for 'posted value' column

Would anyone with write access to the repo mind taking care of the merge, please?
Thanks!

Fix missing semicolon that breaks craft/windows build.

incorporated feedback from Thomas and Jack.

Since I don't have write access to the repository - would either of you mind taking care of the merge?

• fixed blanks betw. parenthesis and brace
• renamed getters
• removed const keyword for return type
• added error message to cmake file

incorporated review feedback

I updated the patch as described above - moved the platform specific stuff into an own library and linked that conditionally. That takes care of all unistd.h / pwd.h related build issues in MSVC that I am aware of.
As I said, if you guys feel that #ifdef's in the source itself are the better solution, I'll be happy to change that accordingly - just let me know.

That makes sense, thanks for clarifying.
Would you mind taking care of merging the patch (I don't have write access to the repo)?
Thanks!

Changed to runtime dependency as requested.

In D8426#158837, @wojnilowicz wrote:

How come it compiles on MSVC if unistd.h is included unconditionally in e.g. kselectdatabasedlg.cpp for geteuid?

Hi Hannah,