Report system legacy

[Derek Atkins]

Christian Stimming <christian at cstimming.de> writes:

> Hi Geert,
>
> Am Dienstag, 25. Juni 2013, 20:09:26 schrieb Geert Janssens:
>> Rewriting this to properly prevent duplicate names is probably possible, but
>> I'd rather move in the other direction: allow duplicate names in custom
>> reports.
>> 
>> My motivations:
>> - I'm working on the uservoice request to allow to save a custom report
>> without requiring to change the name first. ...
>
> Very good!
>
>> So I'd like to drop the restriction on duplicate report names. The
>> consequence would be we can't guarantee anymore that reports stored in old
>> meta files open correctly (that is with the proper options set). They may,
>> but they may not. So I'd add a warning dialog in the code path that loads
>> these old meta files, indicating that the report may or may not have been
>> loaded properly.
>
> Yes. Just drop the 2.2 compatibility restriction. This is really long enough 
> ago.

I think there are two things..  I agree that we can (and should) drop
the 2.2 compatibility restriction for 2.6. 

I also think it's fine to be able to save a report without changing its
name, because that would be a "Custom" report versus an
"Asset&Liability" (etc) report.  So I think that's fine, too.

HOWEVER, I do think that we should only have a single saved report of
the same name.  I.e., if we save a Balance Sheet report it goes into
Custom/Balance Sheet which is fine.  But if you *resave* it, IMHO it
should overwrite the previously saved Custom report of the same name.

Even if we use GUIDs (which can be used to separate A&L/Balance Sheet
from Custom/Balance Sheet) I don't think we should allow multiple Custom
reports of the same name.

> Regards,
>
> Christian

-derek
-- 
       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available