1.7.4 comments

[Tim Wunder]

On 12/2/2002 3:56 PM, someone claiming to be Josh Sled wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 02, 2002 at 01:25:17PM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
<snip>
> |   gnucash, but the interface seems a bit cumbersome, still.  Some years ago
> |   I used to use MS Money; it had a nice, one-at-a-time interface for
> |   disposing of scheduled transactions.  Why did gnucash go with a "make
> |   several passes over the list" approach?
> 
> Because a) the current druid grew from a previous idea about how it would
> work which was even more segmented and b) it made sense to me to do it
> that way... I saw [see] it as a phased process, with explicit transitions.
> None of the 5 people that voice opinions about it suggested anything else.
> 
> 
<snip>

While I originally found the Since Last Run dialog cumbersome at first, I find it much better now and prefer it to how I remember Quicken doing it. GNUCash has it's own way of doing things that don't necessarily translate 1-1 to other accounting packages. That can be good and bad. I spent a great deal of time wishing GNUCash would conform to my way of handling an SX, when, in fact, it has become much easier to have me conform to the GNUCash way :-)

Regards, 
Tim