[GNC] Fwd: The two modules

Christopher Lam christopher.lck at gmail.com
Fri Jun 29 05:22:02 EDT 2018


Hi David

It'd seem the Frozen status relates to transaction status 
(Unreconciled/Cleared/Reconciled/Void/Frozen) only, and is so far unused.

I'm going to amend the balsheet-pnl to the desired format.

This means the accounts are shown sequentially, and *every* account will 
also include children amounts, no exceptions. This means 
Expense:Household will always reflect total household spending. If an 
account has sub-accounts, then the account's own amount will be shown 
first, if it exists, followed by the children amounts. If any child 
account has amount & child accounts, the child total amount shown first, 
then the child own amount (if any), followed by the grandchildren amounts.

This seems to be desired approach. The separate-row multilevel subtotals 
will be completely disabled & removed.

On 29/06/18 02:34, David Carlson wrote:
> Is the 'frozen' status which is already in place but seemingly unused
> supposed to be for this purpose?
>
> David C
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018, 12:31 PM John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us> wrote:
>
>>
>>> On Jun 28, 2018, at 10:10 AM, Geert Janssens <geert.gnucash at kobaltwit.be>
>> wrote:
>>> Op donderdag 28 juni 2018 18:47:18 CEST schreef Stephen M. Butler:
>>>> On 06/27/2018 04:41 PM, DaveC49 wrote:
>>>>> An active non-placeholder account should not have child/subaccounts,
>>>>> although I don't think GnuCash actually prevents this. In this case,
>> the
>>>>> parent account total is the sum of the child subaccount totals plus the
>>>>> sum
>>>>> of any transactions into the parent account itself. This will make a
>>>>> report
>>>>> look to be incorrect as the sum of transactions into the parent
>> account is
>>>>> not presented separately and its total will not be the sum of the child
>>>>> account totals. I can't think of a use case where this would be
>> desirable,
>>>>> but some people may be happy with that behavior. I don't think this
>>>>> behavior has changed since I first checked it out in an earlier version
>>>>> (around 2.2 I think).
>>>> This is a problem.  In a good report the parent with transactions should
>>>> show a line for the parent so that the column total for that parent (on
>>>> the balance sheet) is correct.
>>>>
>>> This seems to make most sense to me:
>>> If a parent has transactions put it twice:
>>> Once as aggregate account and once as an account on it's own. That would
>> meet
>>> both needs. The aggregate will total it's own transactions with those of
>> its
>>> child accounts. Or put differently the aggregate account would treat
>> itself as
>>> a child account.
>> +1
>>
>>>> At least, as a former IT software development manager, I would insist
>>>> that a column total show all of it's inputs.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe the financial folks can band together to get the developers to
>>>> enforce no-transactions to a parent account.
>>> I think we should modify the concepts. "Placeholder" is ambiguous and
>> for the
>>> lack of a better solution is has been abused to make existing accounts
>> read-
>>> only.
>>>
>>> Perhaps it's time to introduce a "View" type account which is only used
>> to
>>> structure the account tree (and as aggregate account in reports) and
>> next to
>>> that introduce a read-only attribute to normal accounts. Placeholder
>> could
>>> then be phased out in favor of these two. We could even try to automate
>> this
>>> using some heuristics:
>>> - if a placeholder account has no transactions, convert it into a view
>> account
>>> - if a placeholder account does have transactions, make it read-only
>> instead.
>>> Add in an informational message to the user about what was done so the
>> user
>>> can make corrections if needed (like adding view accounts if an account
>> was
>>> being used for both functions).
>>>
>> I propose that we combine “placeholder” and “hidden” to “inactive” which
>> removes an account from the picker list and from the Accounts page unless
>> “show inactive accounts” is selected from the filter.
>>
>> While marking an account “placeholder” prevents adding transactions to it,
>> there’s no requirement in GnuCash that an account with children have the
>> placeholder flag set. To strictly follow David Cousen’s advice we’d have to
>> impose that restriction, but some users might find that a bit drastic.
>> Perhaps we could make it a book option?
>>
>> Regards,
>> John Ralls
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnucash-user mailing list
>> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
>> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
>> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
>> -----
>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> _______________________________________________
> gnucash-user mailing list
> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
> -----
> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.



More information about the gnucash-user mailing list