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....@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

_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see 
https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.

Reply via email to