Unintended consequences / retrograde behaviour re 2.6.16 fix of Bug 603379 - Prevent changing some Account Options if it has transactions.

Wm wm_o_o_o at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Apr 30 09:54:43 EDT 2017

On 24/04/2017 23:31, Wm via gnucash-devel wrote:

[ff own post]

> I have long considered it a very-good-thing that gnc allowed accounts to
> be moved between formal accounting objects (assets, liabilities, equity,
> income, expenses) so long as the plus and minus signs underneath worked.
> It looks like fixing 603379 has involved taking much of this freedom
> away, I could understand if some "do you really know what you are
> doing?" interference was added but do not like this introduction of
> nanny at all and I'm not sure if the limit was intentional or
> consequential.  More below.
> The good news for me is that I have kept a working copy of 2.6.15 which
> isn't shackled so I'm ok until the next significant db change.

OK, 2.6.16 has definitely gone too far with immutability.

Consider this:

Assets (type Asset)
  p2p lending (type Asset)
    bids (type Asset)
    cash (type Asset) [1]
    loans (type Asset)

[1] 2.6.16 won't allow me to change
Assets:p2p lending:cash
to type Bank because it contains transactions.


It could be argued that giving Assets insignificant meaning (Bank vs
Cash) was a bad move in the first place, but that decision was taken a
while back.

To say that a sub Asset can't be called Bank because its parent is an
Asset is fucking with sensibility ... I think it also means that a whole
lot of the examples in the tutorials won't work any more :)

Undo the immutability change ASAP, please!


More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list