On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Nick Prater
<..hidden..> wrote:
I'm posting this to document what I consider counter-intuitive behaviour
in ledgersmb - and the work-around I used. I hope this may prove useful to
somebody else finding themselves in the same situation.
Thanks.
This behaviour is because ledgersmb groups together transactions with
identical account, customer, date and source fields, as described in:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=29547777
I think this behaviour is wrong, but understand there are historic reasons
for it, and that some may rely on it.
The behavior certainly is sub-optimal. Given the current database design however, it is as good as we can make it. The basic problem is that we have not re-engineered the financial section of the database yet and so there isn't an alternative which allows people to pay several invoices off with one check. This is one thing I would like to tackle in 1.5.
The standard solution is to have payments be their own journal entries. SQL-Ledger has payments being recorded directly against existing invoices, which is means we can't be particularly sure where one payment ends and another one starts, so currently we group by customer/vendor, cash account, source, date, and voucher_id if applicable.
As I say I would like to fix this by making payments their own journal entries in 1.5, but once we get into that it is a lot of work which has to be done in a single major release.
Best Wishes,
Chris Travers