Any Interest in Configurable Imbalance name

[Lincoln A. Baxter]

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 08:18 -0800, Jason Ahrens wrote:
> Donald Allen said the following on 04/01/2008 7:00 AM:
> > Yep, that's what I was saying above, except that I didn't express my
> >   
> <snip>
> > little of that). I think the underlying behavior is the real  issue
> > and that's what needs to be addressed.
> >   
> 
> I actually don't mind the Imbalance accounts. Every now and then I screw 
> something up and notice that the Imbalance account has a non-0 balance, 
> so I have to fix something.
> 
> As long as the ability for accounts with an imbalanced transaction in 
> them, and finding those imbalanced transactions is easy, I'm happy. I 
> found the Imbalanced account a functional and obvious way to do this. I 
> do agree though that sometimes Gnucash seems a little too eager to 
> assign transactions into it (i.e.: When I'm still editing values in a 
> split and haven't finalized it yet... Though I think Gnucash assumes 
> that if I press "enter", it means I'm done...)
> 
You know, I can live with... even like the Imbalance account.
But when I have fixed all the splits, I would like to get ride of it.
The functionality I would like to see, is the ability to remove the
Imbalance account once all the imbalanced transactions (splits) are
fixed.  The problem is, that you can't remove the account without
deleting all the transactions, even when they are no longer referencing
the imbalance account.  (at least this is how I have interpreted the
warnings). Which I have heeded, because I DON'T want to loose the
transactions. 

If the imbalanced transaction is subsequently balanced, than the
transaction should no longer be listed in the split.  Then when all the
imbalanced transactions are fixed, one could just delete the Imbalance
account.

Lincoln