Geert, Thanks for these remarks. Since I am interested mainly in documentation and its accuracy, your bringing bugs to the list are useful to me. I will try to follow up on any that are listed, especially those that I see as having a documentation impact.
Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: Geert Janssens [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:09 AM > To: Thomas Bullock > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Bug 631789 update > > On Wednesday 20 October 2010, Thomas Bullock wrote: > > Geert, > > > > Thanks for pointing out that my remarks should be part of bug. > Following > > your recommendation, I have added an additional comment to that > bug. > > > Thanks for the comments. > > > How does a bug update get added automatically to the developer's > list? Or > > does it? Do changes to a bug discussion go only to those > subscribing to > > the bug? > > > The list is not automatically informed of updates. People interested > in > further discussion on this topic should subscribe to the bug. I think > that is > ok. If more people on the list had remarks they would have made those > by now. > > Also by my announcement of the existence of the bug, others still > interested > can go over there and subscribe. > > The reason I suggest to follow up on the bug, is that it's better to > keep > comments in one place. If there's a bug report that's the preferred > place as > it's easier to manage feature requests from there. > > Sometimes I come across a bug report that needs more input than it is > getting. > I such cases I sometimes announce the existence of that bug on the > devel list > and ask for more input. Usually some of the other devs and list > followers will > then add there comments to the bug in bugzilla. > > That's roughly how these two communication channels interact for me. > > Geert > > > Tom > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Geert Janssens [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 7:16 AM > > > To: [email protected]; Thomas Bullock > > > Subject: Re: Summary bar description (was: Patch for guide file > > > "ch_basics.xml") > > > > > > On Saturday 16 October 2010, Tom Bullock wrote: > > > > Geert and Juergen, > > > > > > > > Earlier exchanges stated: > > > > > > "Assets" is the sum of all accounts of types Bank, Cash, > Asset, > > > > > > Stock, > > > > > > > > > Mutual Fund, Credit Card, Liability, A/Payable and > A/Receivable, > > > > > > obviously taking the proper sign into account. Calling this > > > > > > "Assets" > > > > > > > > > would indeed be confusing at least. > > > > > > > > Just netting (offsetting credits [liabilities] against debits > > > > > > [assets] > > > > > > > from the balance sheet) these together gives "Net Assets", not > net > > > > worth. Net worth is a duration concept, meaning activity over > time. > > > > > > It > > > > > > > refers to the use of assets to generate income while incurring > > > > > > expenses > > > > > > > to do that. Net Assets is a point-in-time concept and excludes > any > > > > income statement activity. > > > > > > > > Given what has been said to this point, the most accurate term I > > > > > > have > > > > > > > seen is "net assets" for the place where a better name is > needed. > > > > > > This very same issue has recently been reported in a bug: > > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=631789 > > > > > > I have added references there to this thread. > > > > > > I don't speak English accounting language fluently, so I have to > > > accept > > > whatever others agree upon here. I would suggest to continue any > > > further > > > discussion on this description on the bug report. > > > > > > Geert > > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
