GnuCash 2.2.9

[Geert Janssens]

On Thursday 4 February 2010, Mark Haanen wrote:
> Op donderdag 04-02-2010 om 16:25 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Geert
> 
> Janssens:
> > On Thursday 4 February 2010, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> > > Am Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:13:52 +0100 schrieb Christian Stimming:
> > > > Zitat von Mick Sawyer <micksawyer at o2.co.uk>:
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> I've just moved over to Gnucash and I'm trying to display the split
> > > >> accounts in the transfer column of the transaction report. All I can
> > > >> get is transfer to "split". Any ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Incidentally, this has been discussed in bugzilla before. It's caused
> > > > by some combination of option settings and you can switch to your
> > > > expected behaviour by setting the options differently:
> > > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=608098
> > >
> > > Well I can't switch to the expected behaviour in Gnucash 2.2.9 too
> > > ;-(.
> > >
> > > E.g. I have in Konten:Bar a transaction with a split (translated)
> > >
> > > Konten:Bar 20   Expenses:Food  10
> > >                 Expenses:Other 10
> > >
> > >
> > > In the transaction report (Buchungsbericht) I get in all three
> > > involved accounts the word "Vollständig" in the "Umbuchen von/nach"
> > > column. I checked really everything.
> >
> > That is because you have enabled "Other Account Name" ("Name des
> > Gegenkontos") in the options. In case of multi-split transactions, the
> > other account name will always be "Split" ("Vollständig") regardless of
> > multi-line or single.
> 
> I genuinely never realised this. I always assumed that, if you selected
> the option "Auto-split ledger" in the register settings, you'd get the
> behaviour that Ulrike expected.
> 
> While it's not always possible to determine the "other account name" in
> splits, it's doable when there's a single line either debit or credit in
> the split. Pseudo-code:
> 
> If (line_count(opposite_side_of_split)==1) then
> 	show_opposite_name
> elseif (line_count(this_side_of_split)==1) then
> 	show_all_opposite_names
> else
> 	show "--split--"
> 
> Is this feasible for GnuCash or am I missing something?
> 
> - Mark
> 
First off, I never looked at the code for this. I am just as new to this as 
you are. What I wrote is what I understood from reading the bugreport
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=608098

Further, I'm not sure which behavior you would like to see.

In single line mode, there's only one line per transaction. So you can have 
the account name on one side of the equation and 
a. the other account name if there's only one other split in the transaction
or
b. "Split" if there are multiple other splits in the transaction. You can't 
display multiple "other" account names in one line. There's just no room for 
it.

In the case of multiline mode, GnuCash uses a completely different concept: 
for each transaction, every split (both the split in this account and the 
split(s) in the other account(s) !) is printed on a separate line. And every 
split really means every split:  both the split which belongs in the account 
being reported and the split(s) in the other account(s) that balance the 
transaction. So even the most basic transaction, with only two splits (this 
account and other account) will print two lines in multiline mode.

So in multiline mode, there is not really a concept of "Account" and "Other 
Account" anymore. The confusing part is that the configuration gui doesn't 
make this clear. You can still choose "Other Account" information when 
multiline mode is selected, and it will even display some information, but 
this additional information is redundant and confusing.

Looking back at your question, you seem to be asking for a third mode which 
retains the concept of this account versus the other accounts, while printing 
multiple other accounts when required. But thinking deeper on this, it doesn't 
seem to make sense, unless you wish to create a report that ONLY shows the 
other account information for the given account.

So with the given example
Konten:Bar 20   Expenses:Food  10
                Expenses:Other 10

This would result in a report
Konten:Bar
Januar 2010         (Account)       (Other Account)     Deb  Cred 
2010-01-30 Grocery  Konten:Bar      Expenses:Food            10
                    Konten:Bar      Expenses:Other           10

Expenses:Food
Januar 2010         (Account)       (Other Account)     Deb  Cred
2010-01-30 Grocery  Expenses:Food   Konten:Bar          20
                    Expenses:Food   Expenses:Other           10

Expenses:Other
Januar 2010         (Account)       (Other Account)     Deb  Cred
2010-01-30 Grocery  Expenses:Other  Konten:Bar          20
                    Expenses:Other  Expenses:Food            10

This still wouldn't give exactly what Ulrike asked for, because you would get 
multiple lines in all the accounts, not only in Konten:Bar.

But personally I fail to see what benefit this report would have over the true 
multiline mode or the true single line mode. What would be the use case for 
the only-other-account-multiline mode ?

Perhaps there is a good use case. If so, an enhancement request in Bugzilla 
carefully explaining this use case would be a good start to get it 
implemented.

Geert