That could work, but it would force the transaction completer to be aware of the metadata written by the deposit-in-transit plugin; not too cool, but I will think about it. Tx
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Martin Blais <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Filippo Tampieri < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> My use case is due to the interaction of the deposit_in_transit plugin >> and the transaction completer I use during import. >> >> The transaction completer relies on the past entries to figure out which >> account to assign to the second posting of imported entries. >> The deposit_in_transit plugin helps me deal with transactions such as >> credit card payments that appear in both the bank statement and the credit >> card statement. >> For example, when I import my bank account statement, the transaction >> completer would complete an entry like this: >> >> 2016-03-23 * "Payment to AMEX" >> Assets:MyBankAccount -1261.98 CAD >> Assets:DIT:Amex >> >> When I import my credit card statement, the transaction completer would >> complete the corresponding entry like this: >> >> 2016-03-24 * "PAYMENT RECEIVED - THANK YOU" >> Liabilities:Amex 1261.98 CAD >> Assets:DIT:MyBankAccount >> >> As you see, the first entry uses Assets:DIT:Amex to indicate that it is >> depositing funds in the Amex account rather than using the Assets:Amex >> account directly. >> Similarly, the second entry receives the funds from >> Assets:DIT:MyBankAccount rather than directly from Assets:MyBankAccount. >> >> This allows the importers to import all entries and I do not have to >> worry about detecting a transaction that is common to the two statements >> and commenting it out on one side and possibly dealing with the different >> dates of the two entries (which could cause a problem with balance >> assertions in certain cases). >> >> Instead, I run the deposit_in_transit plugin that automatically creates a >> new entry that ties to first two: >> >> 2016-03-24 * "Payment to AMEX / PAYMENT RECEIVED - THANK YOU" >> Assets:DIT:MyBankAccount 1261.98 CAD >> Assets:DIT:Amex >> >> It also tags pending deposits and tags and links cleared transactions, >> but that is beyond the point of this discussion. >> >> The problem I have is caused by an extension I made to the >> deposit_in_transit plugin. When the two entries happen on the same date, >> accountants will usually remove the transaction from the deposit-in-transit >> account (I use a pair of deposit-in-transit accounts, but just because I >> want those account names to give you info about the source and destination >> of the funds in the original entries) and use the original source and >> destination accounts directly. So, my plugin will do this as well and when >> faced with two entries such as: >> >> 2016-03-23 * "Payment to AMEX" >> Assets:MyBankAccount -1261.98 CAD >> Assets:DIT:Amex >> >> 2016-03-23 * "PAYMENT RECEIVED - THANK YOU" >> Liabilities:Amex 1261.98 CAD >> Assets:DIT:MyBankAccount >> >> (note that the only thing changed is that the two entries now share the >> same date), instead of adding a new entry to link them, it will replace >> them with a single entry: >> >> 2016-03-23 * "Payment to AMEX / PAYMENT RECEIVED - THANK YOU" >> Assets:MyBankAccount -1261.98 CAD >> Liabilities:Amex 1261.98 CAD >> >> Nice and tidy. >> But now, here is the problem with the import stage; when importing an >> entry such as: >> >> 2016-03-23 * "Payment to AMEX" >> Assets:MyBankAccount -1261.98 CAD >> >> The transaction completer will look at past entries to come up with a >> reasonable second posting; if it used the results of the deposit_in_transit >> plugin, it would use: >> >> Liabilities:Amex >> >> as the second leg, while I want it to use the same account that I use in >> my beancount file, i.e.: >> >> Assets:DIT:Amex >> >> Otherwise, I will end up with two entries (one from the bank statement >> and one from the credit card statement) describing the same transaction! >> > > >> So, my solution would be to disable the deposit_in_transit plugin when >> using bean-extract. >> > > A simpler and better solution would be for your plugin to mark your > auto-generated transactions (or even the postings themselves) with metadata > to leave a trace to indicate they're to be ignored by the plugin for > learning. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the > Google Groups "Beancount" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/beancount/IUlEVn3v3oE/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to > [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhPPt2ObEm1zh_3wUb9oqD9KkNb40itPyGTAhTif9V%3DiZw%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhPPt2ObEm1zh_3wUb9oqD9KkNb40itPyGTAhTif9V%3DiZw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAKgGm2i2UHyZ-pJMKVzB%3DgQZEVRgShY7pEedxDD2Tq3dT3HcQA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
