Re: [GNC-dev] gnucash maint: Set the SWIG minimum version to 2.0.11 now that we require Guile-2.0.

[John Ralls]

> On Aug 11, 2018, at 1:27 AM, Geert Janssens  
> wrote:
> 
> Op vrijdag 10 augustus 2018 22:02:28 CEST schreef John Ralls:
>> Updated   via  https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/commit/22dd716b 
>> (commit)
>>  from  https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/commit/2f861bc2 (commit)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> commit 22dd716b58a6a9c424a71268f78af37b972ab23b
>> Author: John Ralls 
>> Date:   Fri Aug 10 12:57:46 2018 -0700
>> 
>>Set the SWIG minimum version to 2.0.11 now that we require Guile-2.0.
>> 
>> diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt
>> index f5d372e..42a23b6 100644
>> --- a/CMakeLists.txt
>> +++ b/CMakeLists.txt
>> @@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ endif (WIN32)
>> 
>> # SWIG
>> if(GENERATE_SWIG_WRAPPERS)
>> -  find_package (SWIG REQUIRED)
>> +  find_package (SWIG 2.0.10 REQUIRED)
> 
> Interestingly your comment says to require 2.0.11 but you enforce only 2.0.10
> 
> Which version is the correct minimum one ?

Darn. It should be 2.0.10, according to your code from 2.6’s configure.ac.

Regards,
John Ralls

___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

Re: [GNC-dev] New balsheet (and P report), API considerations, and (slow?) KVP in Account.cpp

[John Ralls]

Chris,

Remember that we’ve long advised users that they need not close their books, 
they can run a balance sheet report for any day. IMO removing that capability 
would be a major breakage.

I suspect that you needed to use trading accounts because you didn’t book the 
trading gains and losses as income. Users should do that regardless of using 
trading accounts and doing so should make it unnecessary for the balance sheet 
report to include trading accounts.

Unrealized gains are another matter entirely and are a result of using prices 
from the price database instead of actual cost from the transaction data. IMO 
the balance sheet report shouldn’t be taking prices from the price db and 
shouldn’t be able to see unrealized gains, but if price source is going to be 
an option then an unrealized gains line flows from that so that users don’t 
waste a bunch of time chasing an imbalance caused by price differences.

https://bugs.gnucash.org/show_bug.cgi?id=775368 
 is related because that’s 
currently how the balance sheet report gets the “actual” costs.

Regards,
John Ralls

> On Aug 10, 2018, at 11:40 PM, Christopher Lam  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi John
> 
> I've managed to make the left-side (activa?) match the right-side (passiva?)
> 
> https://screenshots.firefox.com/RNvkjaxnYyxpGkYn/null
> 
> 1) it does require closing books on the balance-sheet date
> 
> 2) it does require adding trading-accounts
> 
> The existing balsheet introduces/calculates the "Retained Earnings", "Trading 
> Gains" and "Unrealized Gains", whereas the current iteration of new-balsheet 
> will not.
> 
> To me this is the easiest method to ensure both sides produce the same total, 
> and is now technically correct - if the user has not closed their books, the 
> balance sheet won't balance.
> 
> This is giving me a headache :(
> 
> Should a new balsheet calculate and report these '(fake) retained earnings', 
> and 'unrealized gains' ???
> 
> C
> 
> 
> On 09/08/18 08:32, John Ralls wrote:
>> 
>>> On Aug 8, 2018, at 8:51 AM, Geert Janssens  
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I haven't been following every detail of this. However I note on most 
>>> balance
>>> sheets the total assets doesn't match total net worth (or 
>>> liabilities/equity).
>>> In most, this is fixed by including the retained earnings.
>>> 
>>> I believe at least in most European countries the "left hand side" (Assets,
>>> Active) and "right hand side" (Passive or liabilities + equity) of the
>>> multicolumn view should balance (it's called balance sheet for a reason).
>>> That would suggest retained earnings does have to be part of the balance
>>> sheet.
>>> 
>>> However I'm not an accountant and perhaps your book is slightly contrived 
>>> so I
>>> don't know the exact answer here.
>>> 
>>> As for the "multi-column" vs one column debate, both present the same data.
>>> The only difference is visual representation or style.
>>> 
>>> As of recently I have become a strong proponent of separating structure (or
>>> accounting functionality in a different context) from style, I think this
>>> should be delegated to the realm of css. This particular layout variation 
>>> can
>>> IMO be handled by making divs for each large group and either let them 
>>> follow
>>> normal flow or use float to move them next to each other. If you will you 
>>> can
>>> have a European style sheet and an American one, or an Australian or 
>>> whatever.
>>> 
>>> As for "categories", I read Frank's earlier reply as if he agreed that at
>>> least for now the account organization is something to be done in the CoA, 
>>> not
>>> in report code.
>> The Balance Sheet is indeed supposed to balance, but in normal practice it 
>> balances only when the book is “closed”, i.e. when all of the income and 
>> expense accounts are summed up and added to Equity. In US corporate books 
>> the cumulative total of income and expenses lives in an Equity account 
>> called “Retained Earnings”.
>> 
>> In the pen-and-paper days a  “Trial Balance” was computed outside of the 
>> books before closing as a way to catch errors before making the closing 
>> entries and writing the formal Balance Sheet.
>> 
>> GnuCash's existing Balance Sheet Report creates the “Retained Earnings” line 
>> so that one need not close the books (Tools>Close Book) in order to get a 
>> balanced report. Removing that feature might be more formally correct but it 
>> would mean that users would have to close their book before running a 
>> balance sheet. That would be a big change and I don’t think that we want to 
>> do it. On the other hand “Retained Earnings” isn’t the right term for many 
>> cases, so it would be a useful improvement to make it configurable.
>> 
>> There’s a second problem with the current report as well: If the user does 
>> close their books periodically they’ll have an account for the accumulation 
>> that may well be called “Retained Earnings”. The Balance Sheet Report will 
>> dutifully 

Re: [GNC-dev] gnucash maint: Set the SWIG minimum version to 2.0.11 now that we require Guile-2.0.

[Geert Janssens]

Op vrijdag 10 augustus 2018 22:02:28 CEST schreef John Ralls:
> Updatedvia  https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/commit/22dd716b 
> (commit)
>   from  https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash/commit/2f861bc2 (commit)
> 
> 
> 
> commit 22dd716b58a6a9c424a71268f78af37b972ab23b
> Author: John Ralls 
> Date:   Fri Aug 10 12:57:46 2018 -0700
> 
> Set the SWIG minimum version to 2.0.11 now that we require Guile-2.0.
> 
> diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt
> index f5d372e..42a23b6 100644
> --- a/CMakeLists.txt
> +++ b/CMakeLists.txt
> @@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ endif (WIN32)
> 
>  # SWIG
>  if(GENERATE_SWIG_WRAPPERS)
> -  find_package (SWIG REQUIRED)
> +  find_package (SWIG 2.0.10 REQUIRED)

Interestingly your comment says to require 2.0.11 but you enforce only 2.0.10

Which version is the correct minimum one ?

Geert


___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel

Re: [GNC-dev] New balsheet (and P report), API considerations, and (slow?) KVP in Account.cpp

[Christopher Lam]

Hi John

I've managed to make the left-side (activa?) match the right-side (passiva?)

https://screenshots.firefox.com/RNvkjaxnYyxpGkYn/null

1) it does require closing books on the balance-sheet date

2) it does require adding trading-accounts

The existing balsheet introduces/calculates the "Retained Earnings", 
"Trading Gains" and "Unrealized Gains", whereas the current iteration of 
new-balsheet will not.


To me this is the easiest method to ensure both sides produce the same 
total, and is now technically correct - if the user has not closed their 
books, the balance sheet won't balance.


This is giving me a headache :(

Should a new balsheet calculate and report these '(fake) retained 
earnings', and 'unrealized gains' ???


C


On 09/08/18 08:32, John Ralls wrote:



On Aug 8, 2018, at 8:51 AM, Geert Janssens  wrote:

I haven't been following every detail of this. However I note on most balance
sheets the total assets doesn't match total net worth (or liabilities/equity).
In most, this is fixed by including the retained earnings.

I believe at least in most European countries the "left hand side" (Assets,
Active) and "right hand side" (Passive or liabilities + equity) of the
multicolumn view should balance (it's called balance sheet for a reason).
That would suggest retained earnings does have to be part of the balance
sheet.

However I'm not an accountant and perhaps your book is slightly contrived so I
don't know the exact answer here.

As for the "multi-column" vs one column debate, both present the same data.
The only difference is visual representation or style.

As of recently I have become a strong proponent of separating structure (or
accounting functionality in a different context) from style, I think this
should be delegated to the realm of css. This particular layout variation can
IMO be handled by making divs for each large group and either let them follow
normal flow or use float to move them next to each other. If you will you can
have a European style sheet and an American one, or an Australian or whatever.

As for "categories", I read Frank's earlier reply as if he agreed that at
least for now the account organization is something to be done in the CoA, not
in report code.

The Balance Sheet is indeed supposed to balance, but in normal practice it 
balances only when the book is “closed”, i.e. when all of the income and 
expense accounts are summed up and added to Equity. In US corporate books the 
cumulative total of income and expenses lives in an Equity account called 
“Retained Earnings”.

In the pen-and-paper days a  “Trial Balance” was computed outside of the books 
before closing as a way to catch errors before making the closing entries and 
writing the formal Balance Sheet.

GnuCash's existing Balance Sheet Report creates the “Retained Earnings” line so 
that one need not close the books (Tools>Close Book) in order to get a balanced 
report. Removing that feature might be more formally correct but it would mean 
that users would have to close their book before running a balance sheet. That 
would be a big change and I don’t think that we want to do it. On the other hand 
“Retained Earnings” isn’t the right term for many cases, so it would be a useful 
improvement to make it configurable.

There’s a second problem with the current report as well: If the user does 
close their books periodically they’ll have an account for the accumulation 
that may well be called “Retained Earnings”. The Balance Sheet Report will 
dutifully report the contents of that account and, if there are income and 
expenses after the last close, add a second “Retained Earnings” line. That 
looks a bit odd and might be confusing; ISTR we’ve had comments on the user 
list about just that.

Regards,
John Ralls

___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel


___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel