[GNC-dev] About budgets in 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10

[Christopher Lam]

Deadline is 11 April at noon GMT, so, about 34 hours from now.

For both: *existing* datafile and especially *4.x-featured *datafile (in
bug report).

Please test:
- creation of budget amounts
- use estimate to prefill cells
- all totals in all 5 account types A/L/Inc/Exp/Eq behave appropriately
- budget.scm report (optionally other budget reports but these are lower
priority) and especially difference column.

On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 02:16, Adrien Monteleone <
adrien.monteleone at lusfiber.net> wrote:

> Thank You! This makes it so much easier to test. I’ll give the flatpak a
> spin and see what I find. I still haven’t set up a build environment for
> Mac yet. (and watching a recent thread on the subject makes it look
> daunting compared to Linux)
>
> This is a busy weekend for me though. What kind of time frame do you have
> and is there something in particular you’re looking to find. (other than
> just loosely that the totals appear to work)
>
> Regards,
> Adrien
>
> > On Apr 9, 2020 w15d100, at 9:10 PM, Christopher Lam <
> christopher.lck at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 2020-04-07 nightly available at
> https://code.gnucash.org/builds/win32/maint/
> > flatpaks available at https://code.gnucash.org/builds/flatpak/maint/ -
> use
> > between 2020-04-04 and 2020-04-10
> >
> > On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 01:38, Christopher Lam <christopher.lck at gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> This topic is about budgets.
> >>
> >> We now know that budgets are currently inherently flawed: they *assume*
> >> that sign-reversal = credit-accounts, and do not work well at all with
> any
> >> other sign-reversal option. In addition, there was a feature request
> (bug
> >> 781345) that introduced budget equity into the equation, and I still do
> not
> >> know whether a budget equity amount is a correct approach.
> >>
> >> In 4.x series there is a planned *fix* which will scan budget amounts,
> >> use heuristics to determine the most likely sign-reversal approach used
> >> during budget creation, internally unreverse the amounts, and upgrade
> the
> >> datafile so that it cannot be damaged by 3.7 or earlier.
> >>
> >> Therefore 3.8 was the first release which could handle both old and
> fixed
> >> budget amounts. Unfortunately, the interpretation of budget signs was/is
> >> very difficult, which explained the switch to
> >> asset/liability/equity/income/expense totals, which are impervious to
> >> budget signs. Unfortunately users missed the "Remaining to Budget"
> facility.
> >>
> >> Therefore 3.9 was, during development, tested with
> >> https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/pull/630 and was deemed "good
> enough"
> >> to fix to restore the remaining to budget total. Unfortunately the
> >> liability budget amount issue was tested incorrectly.
> >>
> >> For a week, the git-maint contained a candidate fix, discussed in
> >> https://bugs.gnucash.org/show_bug.cgi?id=797659 -- but there is
> >> insufficient beta testing on the budgets for now. So, 3.10 will retain
> 3.9
> >> behaviour unless the fix is fully tested.
> >>
> >> Conclusion: this is a call for beta testers, using the 2020-04-07
> nightly
> >> (the only one with the fix), to test both their datafiles and the
> >> *4.x-featured* datafile attached in the bug report. Please *especially*
> >> test the liability and equity totals, both with existing datafile and
> >> featured datafile.
> >>
> >> Flame away. I will try to be available throughout the day for testing.
> >> Win32 users have only 1 build to test, Linux users may also build from
> >> 882fd22ca rather than git-maint which has returned to 3.9 behaviour. I'm
> >> not sure how MacOS users can test.
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnucash-devel mailing list
> > gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-devel mailing list
> gnucash-devel at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
>