> > If auto-fill as you describe was implemented, I would assume that
> > would lessen the need for 'recurring transactions'
> > i.e. automatically generated transactions that happen
> > every-so-often. Would 'recurring transactions' still be an
> > intersting feature to many people, or would it be a pretty much
> > boring?
>
> For me at least it's interesting. Recently I've been thinking about
> this a little more (and filling Bill in on some of the old discussions
> since he's only recently joined the list).
>
> I'm trying to get an idea of what the "full blown" concept might look
> like, and then see how a subset of that can be defined that's
> relatively easy to implement so we can go ahead. I'll write something
> up when my thoughts have settled and we can hammer on it. I believe
> we have nearly all the infrastructure we need now for a useful level-0
> implementation, so it shouldn't be a big deal.
I do have some code to do recurring transactions that I started to
work on when I asked about them a few months ago. Unfortunately my
spare time to work on it ran out pretty quickly. The code doesn't
take advantage of any infrastructure that's been added recently, but
should be able to create and save a recurring transaction and detect
transactions that are due to be paid. There are a bunch of things
that need to be cleaned up and GUI work that needs to be done to
make it actually useful.
I'm not likely to have time to work on it in the near future.
If there is anyone interested in working on it I could hand off the
code I've written to be (used | referenced | ignored) if that would
be useful.
Matt Condell
--
Gnucash Developer's List
To unsubscribe send empty email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
