[GNC] Upgrade Path from version 2.6.16 on MacOS High Sierra (10.13.6) and beyond

[D]

Well, in addition to the malformed subtotals with respect to user sign preferences, there's the problem that the method for producing a totals-only report has been substantially reworked. 

In 2.6, using "Show totals" and "Suppress transaction detail" worked to create a report that did just that. In version 3, that saved report results in output that shows transaction detail (but no transaction amounts), and no totals. You have to edit the options, add back the amount on transaction detail, but then change a setting on a different tab to set "Sorting / Show subtotals only (hide transactional data)".

That, to me, is incompatible. 

While it is true that there is a workaround for this, it requires the user to reconfigure every saved report based on the transaction report. And then the report won't work on 2.6 any more. 

Since the OP was inquiring about backward compatibility, I felt he should be made aware of this one. And since you were intimately involved with both the report rewrite AND the thread in which I raised this issue previously, I figured you were aware of it. 

If you revisit the earlier thread, you will see that I was not vague at all; I was quite specific. At least I was specific enough that you seemed to understand it and guide me immediately to the proper workaround. 

David

On January 28, 2019, at 10:10 PM, Christopher Lam <christopher.lck at gmail.com> wrote:

Hi David


I run 2.6.21 and 3.4 side by side on my machine on the same data file without trouble. The visual experiences can’t be optimized for both since they use different UI engines but the same configuration files it seems. 

There are also numerous incompatibilities with the standard reports between the versions, which make it moderately annoying to run them across versions. Specifically, the Transaction report total settings are completely different and incompatible, making a saved report based on this unusable in one or the other versions. While it would be preferable for these reports to preserve backwards compatibility, I am willing to accept the loss for the joy of having someone finally working on reports...


The place to document such incompatibilities is within bugzilla rather than vague complaints of 'something broken'.


There was utmost care to try preserve options compatibility except in cases whereby the old option (eg. incorrect subtotal signs) led to completely wrong output. In more than one case, behaviour was modified to accommodate and maintain compatibility, at the expense of potentially adding new features / better cleanup. 


It is very helpful to know the report options used, so that the report can be analysed. Small test files are also extremely useful. Hence the new-ish option 'General / Add options summary' in the Transaction Report was designed specifically for this purpose -- to demonstrate which options were used in generating a report. The aim is to add this feature to *all* reports, but time is lacking. 


With regards to subtotals signs -- I agree it's not perfect yet -- but still don't know the best approach to determine subtotals signs. Comments are welcome.


C