[kmymoney] [Bug 463854] When transaction is imported and match a configured Payee, the date info from Payee is lost
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463854 --- Comment #5 from Antoine T --- Please note that there is an error in the test scenario I have written in description. I said it is an OFX file while describing a QIF file. The test scenario of the issue is actually with a QIF file, because there is no issue with an OFX file. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[kmymoney] [Bug 463854] When transaction is imported and match a configured Payee, the date info from Payee is lost
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463854 Antoine T changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|REPORTED|RESOLVED --- Comment #4 from Antoine T --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 351535 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[kmymoney] [Bug 463854] When transaction is imported and match a configured Payee, the date info from Payee is lost
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463854 --- Comment #3 from Antoine T --- I am closing this ticket as I didn't see I have opened a duplicate ticket #351535 in 2015 (!). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[kmymoney] [Bug 463854] When transaction is imported and match a configured Payee, the date info from Payee is lost
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463854 --- Comment #2 from Antoine T --- (In reply to Jack from comment #1) > I believe in master branch, the original field from which Payee was detected > is included in it's entirety in the memo. I don't know if there is any > chance that this will be back-ported to 5.1 or not. What date does the > transaction end up having? Also - saying the date is lost implies that > there is a date field in the import which is lost. What is actually lost is > the full original content of the Payee field, Have I understood correctly? Exactly, the date lost is not the transaction date field, but the time of operation date, that is in the content of Payee field. You understood correctly. Also, the mechanism should be an option in case there is already information in MEMO field provided by the bank. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
[kmymoney] [Bug 463854] When transaction is imported and match a configured Payee, the date info from Payee is lost
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=463854 --- Comment #1 from Jack --- I believe in master branch, the original field from which Payee was detected is included in it's entirety in the memo. I don't know if there is any chance that this will be back-ported to 5.1 or not. What date does the transaction end up having? Also - saying the date is lost implies that there is a date field in the import which is lost. What is actually lost is the full original content of the Payee field, Have I understood correctly? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
