[GNC] Bulk Operations on

[Jim DeLaHunt]

Ulrich:

On 2025-01-29 04:19, Ulrich Schwardmann via gnucash-user wrote:
> Dear Jim, all,
>
> just for completeness: The statement you mentioned below didn't came not
> from my side. ...

That statement being:

Am 28.01.25 um 23:41 schrieb Jim DeLaHunt:

> ...However, when I read,
>
>>> ... the importance of this
>>> feature so we might have a formal solution that we can put into the
>>> document section. Gnucash cuts into the prosumer market where users do
>>> need such "advanced" features. ...
> I interpret, "the GnuCash project should have a formal solution but it
> doesn't, and the contributors to the project are making a mistake by
> not delivering this formal solution for the prosumer market instead of
> whatever else it is they are doing".
>
> It is one thing to point out a shortcoming in a project which makes
> your use of it more difficult. It is quite another thing to have an
> expectation that you are entitled to someone else contributing work to
> fix that shortcoming.


Ulrich, I apologise for reading your message wrong:
<https://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-user/2025-January/115256.html>. 

I now see that you were quoting a 2020 message to GnuCash-user from 
Weiwu Zhang 
<https://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-user/2020-December/094266.html>:

> ...I feel starting the
> conversation again is the only way to call out the importance of this
> feature so we might have a formal solution that we can put into the
> document section. Gnucash cuts into the prosumer market where users do
> need such "advanced" features....
In my defense, the way you chose to quote that message in yours did not 
make it clear to me that you were quoting another message.


On 2025-01-29 04:19, Ulrich Schwardmann via gnucash-user wrote:

> Conversely I completely agree to your answer. OpenSource is based on
> best effort. This itself is a lot of responsibility. Good ideas are
> fine, but any realization is often hard work beyond best effort.
>
> Anyway thanks for all your best effort in this project.
>
We are in agreement. Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.
        —Jim DeLaHunt