Another one unhappy with quickfill

[Anthony Dardis]

FWIW I'm ok with it. Quicken does the same thing. Most of the time  
quickfill does precisely what you want; and sometimes it puts in something  
you don't want.

Any thoughts about a middle way: not turn it off, but somehow make it more  
likely that you catch it before it does the wrong thing in those  
situations?




On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:07:17 -0500, Robert Plantz <rgplantz at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On 1/16/2011 10:41 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
>> On Sunday 16 January 2011, Paul Abrahams wrote:
>>> Derek asked, "What is it about quickfill that you don't like?"  Well,
>>> sometimes it will create a split transaction because I once had one but
>>> don't want one any longer.  And filling in a  split when it really  
>>> isn't
>>> one is a lot of unnecessary work.  Even making the split go away is
>>> unnecessary labor.
>>>
>>> I can understand the arguments for quickfill, but what I don't  
>>> understand
>>> is why it isn't optional, given that many people dislike it.  It  
>>> shouldn't
>>> be that difficult to do.
>> Quite frankly, you're the second person I hear complaining about it. I  
>> have
>> some difficulty calling that "many".
>>
>> As for making the quickfill feature optional (assuming for now that  
>> doing so
>> is a good idea), that is likely not too difficult, but still someone  
>> has to do
>> it...
>>
>> Geert
> I'll increase the number of complaints by 50% by becoming the third  
> person. :-)
>
> My only complaint is with quickfill creating a split when the last  
> transaction with the same name was a split.
>
> Please note that this is a very minor annoyance to me. Won't make it  
> onto my list of top 100 complaints this year.
>
> --Bob
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.