Trying to create a 24-weekly Scheduled Transaction

[R. Victor Klassen]

I would agree that while you could want a different day of the week than the start date, it would be a sensible default.

And therefore this is a reasonable suggestion for either a bug fix or enhancement request.   Not sure it really qualifies as a bug.   I can't say it's high priority, though.


This fits in the 'usability' category, where GNUcash is somewhat weak relative to its (paid) competition.   While there is rarely something you need to do when managing personal or small business finances that can't be done with GNUcash, and real errors of the sort that create wrong answers are rare [I don't know of any, but it is software], there are various features that are not as smooth as they could be.


On 2013-05-02, at 1:06 AM, Michael Hendry wrote:

> I subscribe to a magazine which is published thirteen times a year, but whose subscription is paid by direct debit every six issues (i.e. every 24 weeks).
> 
> When I try to set up this transaction, with a frequency of Weekly, every 24 weeks starting on 6th June 2013 and lasting forever, I'm told "You have attempted to set up a Scheduled Transaction which will never run. Do you really want to do this?".
> 
> I've worked around this by selecting "Monday" as the day of the week for the transaction, but this means that the date will be wrong for six transactions in every seven.
> 
> I did try selecting all seven days, but it looks as though this will set up a run of seven consecutive daily transactions every 24 weeks.
> 
> I can tolerate having a relatively small transaction appearing up to six days late, using the work-around above, but I don't think I should be forced to do so - am I missing something here?
> 
> Michael
> 
> (Using version 2.4.11 on Mac OS X version 10.8.3).
> _______________________________________________
> 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.