The payment amount must be greater than zero
vahur.lokk at gmail.com
Mon Aug 20 06:31:38 EDT 2007
Patrik Lermon wrote:
> On 8/20/07, Derek Atkins <warlord at mit.edu> wrote:
>> Underlying assumptions in the business features that Invoices are always
>> on sign and Payments are always the other. A negative payment would
>> therefore look like an Invoice.. but it's NOT an invoice.. And it would
>> confuse the payment-merging processing for handling over/under-payments
>> across multiple invoices.
> I think that assumption is actually wrong.
> I mean, credit invoices are a rather common way to solve when you accidentally
> invoiced someone, or invoiced the wrong amount etc.
I must agree with Patrik. Mistakes do happen, and in a real, cold harsh
world of accounting you just do not delete mistaken invoices, you do not
cover them with shadow payment, you credit them.
As for the abovementioned payment-merging process, this is in itself an
architectural mistake that has to be overwritten sooner or later.
Multiple-payment system that does not allow for picking
non-consequential invoices to be paid just does not survive in a real
life very long.
Negative payment should never look like invoice, but exactly what it is,
negative payment, correction of a mistake. The same applies to negative
I quite understand, that Gnucash is in a painful transition process from
personal finance program to SMB accounting program and such glitches are
obviously a burden of its past. Maybe 3.0? 4.0?
More information about the gnucash-devel