So much to say, so little time.

Here: the correct way to do this is to track this in a separate account,
like this:
http://furius.ca/beancount/doc/shared

Another way is for you to pay all the expenses and "bill" your roommate by
creating and maintaining him/her a dedicated liabilities account. You can
just print a register of that account to provide them with the necessary
details of their balance.

Trying to keep a single shared pot of money/liabilities requires you to
maintain two subaccounts of the real account. It's a PIA and requires
discipline. I prefer the two methods above.





On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Richard Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:

> John Wiegley <[email protected]> writes:
>
> >>>>>> Richard Lawrence <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> I think what I'd like to do is limit transactions by the *related*
> account,
> >> something like
> >
> >> ledger --limit 'related =~ /assets:Me/' reg expenses:shared
> >
> > One reason this doesn't exist is because there can be multiple related
> > accounts.
>
> Right, good point.
>
> > I suppose that "related" could become the textual sum of all the
> > related accounts?
>
> After thinking about this, I'm not sure it would work in my current
> setup.  I have transactions like this:
>
> 2015/08/07 Shared credit card payment
>     liabilities:shared:CC                     $1000.00
>     assets:Me:Checking                        $-600.00
>     assets:Roommate                           $-400.00
>
> I'd like to be able to use two different expressions here to generate
> two reports, for Me and for Roommate.  The first report would include my
> $600 payment in the running total of what I've paid toward the shared
> account; the second report would include my roommate's $400 payment in
> her running total.
>
> So, given my current setup, I guess what I would need is a way to limit
> by individual related accounts within a transaction, not just their
> textual sum.  I was envisioning "related =~ /assets:Me/" in the
> pseudo-command above as selecting just my `side' of transactions like
> this for inclusion into the report.  I have no idea if that's compatible
> with the way ledger actually works internally, though.
>
> (This may not be the best way to record such payments, though it does
> make it easy to see at a glance that the correct total amount was paid,
> while recording the different contributions.  But I'm willing to switch
> to separate transactions if it makes the reporting easier.)
>
> Best,
> Richard
>
> --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ledger" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Ledger" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to