Just to be clear, I did test the Action field both with and without the “Use Split Action field for number” setting. Neither case resulted in clearing the reconcile flag. This was tested on 3.2 on MacOS High Sierra.
In both cases, trying to change the NUM field DID clear the fire the warning and clear the flag. (if proceeding with the edit) Since this was a change introduce in 3.0, the 2.6 series should not be affected and you can edit the NUM field to your content without clearing the flag. Regards, Adrien > On Aug 13, 2018, at 1:34 PM, David Carlson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Dale > > Watch that other thread about release 3.2 possibly different from 2.6.x. > > So far I have not seen any comments about whether editing the action field > does or does not unreconcile a particular split line. > > David C > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2018, 1:03 PM Adrien Monteleone > <[email protected]> wrote: > There is a warning. You get to continue to edit the transaction and thus > clear the flag, or cancel and don’t edit the transaction. There is not an > option to both edit and not clear the flag. > > Note, the flag only clears for amounts, accounts, NUM, and I suspect dates, > but I didn’t test that last one yet. > > As John Ralls noted in an earlier reply, NUM was added as a trigger for this > in response to a bug report. NUM might be a check number, which should not be > changed once reconciled. (at least not without confirming this by > re-reconciling) > > The casual user simply should re-reconcile the account if you really need to > change one of these fields. If you don’t want to do it on the spot, simply > mark that split as cleared ‘c’ and it will be checked off for you on the next > reconciliation. Since you aren’t changing the amounts, this will not throw > off the reconciliation calculations. It will just be ‘cleaning up’ and > confirming that transaction is now correct. > > Regards, > Adrien > > > On Aug 13, 2018, at 12:42 PM, Dale Alspach <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I have not switched to the 3.x version so I have no experience with the > > implementation. However I find the notion of unreconciling > > a transaction to be strange. Reconciliation is normally about matching a > > group of transaction to an external document such as a bank or credit card > > statement. Changing the flag from y to n of one or more transactions breaks > > the reconciliation. What is the casual user supposed to do at this point? > > > > At minimum the user should be given the option of preserving the > > reconciliation flag. Popping up a warning puts the user on notice that > > there may be a material change but the user is responsible for deciding > > this and what to do about it. > > > > Dale > > _______________________________________________ > > gnucash-user mailing list > > [email protected] > > 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. > > > > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-user mailing list > [email protected] > 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. _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list [email protected] 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.
