I know I shouldn't expect any "fix" unless I can clearly identify what
is broken. I do have some more ideas to play with, but as it's only a
nuisance, and not a show-stopper, it's not a very high priority.
One thing I did notice while testing - I tried to create a new payee
with a blank name, and it said there already was one, and did I really
mean to create another. I said no, although I might try yes later.
The problem is, there is not any payee with an empty name, so I'm not
sure why it gave that error.
One other thing I realized is that I have automatic matching ON for
that blank payee, and that is clearly why so many imported transactions
are using that payee. What I might to is to change the name of that
payee to not be blank, and then I'll probably be able to remove the
payee from the transactions that don't need it.
Question - should it also be safe just to change Payee="P000845" to
Payee="" in the file directly without breaking anything else? It might
end up being the fastest way, but I'm not sure I trust it. (I would
definitely make several backups first :-))
On 2017.07.26 12:30, Łukasz Wojniłowicz wrote:
Hi Jack,
We can forbid importing payees with empty names. Not reproducible
bugs are
hard to fix.
Cheers
Łukasz
Dnia wtorek, 25 lipca 2017 19:22:48 CEST Jack pisze:
> In checking for unused payees, I found I have a blank payee
(name="" in
> the xml file, so really blank, no spaces, it happens to be
> id="P000854"). I have no idea how this got created - probably
during
> an OFX import years ago, as the oldest transaction for this account
> (from the Payees view) is in 2014, and is an investment transaction
> imported from Merrill Lynch, which as caused me all sorts of issues
> over the years.
>
> At some later point, I eventually want to get rid of this payee,
as
> it seems all the transactions listing this payee should really not
have
> any payee - they are investment transactions and transfers.
>
> However, in looking at the list, several of the transactions have
"***
> UNASSIGNED ***". It seems these are all transfers between a
> brokerage/checking account and another account (brokerage or
checking
> or cash). In looking carefully at these, they all have a memo. If
I
> remove the memo, the "*** UNASSIGNED ***" disappears from the
> transaction in the Payee view. I have tried to create a small test
KMY
> file, but have so far not been able to reproduce the issue.
>
> I'm not sure if I want to call it a bug, since I don't think the
blank
> payee should exist at all, and I suspect that if the transfer
> transaction were missing a payee, KMM would not complain about it
> missing a category.
>
> Any thoughts or comments?
>
> Jack
