On Mar 28, 2007, at 6:05 AM, Derek Atkins wrote: > > And a "File -> Import" would be an "easily identifiable atomic > operation". > You did "File -> Import -> xxx" and followed a series of steps and > then > clicked "Done" or "Finish" or "Import" and gnucash did some magic.
Except that the "magic" is what must be undone, not what you clicked, and it is decidedly less atomic. > I don't know how much more atomic you can get from a user's > perspective! The user's perspective is that a number of things happen on import. Presumably, lots of transactions, new accounts created, new commodities, etc. Which one would you like for them to single out for the purposes of atomizing it in their minds? >> I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the user to save their >> file before an import and simply reopen that save in the case >> that it goes horribly wrong. Again, maybe it's just me... as for >> not tying undo to an account, I wholeheartedly agree. > > It's extremely unreasonable when we finally move to the SQL backend > and there's no way to "not save" after the import because each commit > causes data to get written to disk. In this case you would WANT an > "undo import"! Good point. My point isn't that it absolutely shouldn't be done, but rather that I doubt most users have the expectation of being able to undo a full import. Jeff _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel