On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Brian Exelbierd <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016, at 01:39 PM, Manish Rai Jain wrote:
>
> Thanks! That definitely helps.
>
> I think the documentation needs updating (documentation being one of my
> main gripes with ledger). I'd suggest a solution: Host the documentation on
> wiki, which would allow community to build and keep the documentation up to
> date. Issues like these for e.g., could be easily marked by the user as
> "not working", and then updated by someone in the know-how with the right
> instructions. That collaborative effort on documentation is the only way to
> keep high quality and easy to understand documentation.
>
>
> We don't need a wiki (even though we do already have one), we have
> something much better.  Git.
>

*giggles*


You can submit a pull request on GitHub here:
>
> https://github.com/ledger/ledger/blob/next/doc/ledger3.texi#L7734
>
> You can track this as a problem by opening an issue there as well.
>
This way everyone keeps everything in one place.
>

You really don't get collaboration. For tech nerds who are already heavily
involved in submitting changes to a project, that's a logistically superior
solution, in theory. The problem is that it leaves out most potential
contributors to documentation fixes or even just pointing out a sentence or
paragraph they might not understand. For either non-tech users, or users
who have never submitted changes to the project (or filed a pull request on
github for that matter, keep in mind most users' knowledge of git extends
to about two commands: git clone and git pull), that's just not going to
happen. I'd go even further: even if one's able to make the pull request,
the amount of trouble to go through is a threshold that most people don't
bother crossing. I certainly would have better things to do with my time
for a one-liner fix.

Let me spell it out:

  The easier and quicker non-technical people are able to contribute to
documentation, the more they will.

A system that would let a user highlight, then click, then type, then be
done with it would be ideal (e.g. Google Docs). A wiki is a slightly
inferior alternative - users have to at least learn some syntax and wade
through some of the source document - but a good compromise nevertheless. I
think Manish has the right idea.




> regards,
>
> bex
>
>
> For starters, the wikia service could be used (to avoid the pains of
> setting up our own):
> http://www.wikia.com
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 17, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Brian (bex) Exelbierd <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> > On Dec 17, 2016, at 6:16 AM, Manish R Jain <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I'm trying to build a budget, following section 9 in the manual.
> > http://www.ledger-cli.org/3.0/doc/ledger3.html#Budgeting-and-Forecasting
> >
> > This command is mentioned in the doc to help determine the average
> spending per expenses category. But, when I use it, the numbers are out of
> whack. They're way too low.
> >
> > $ ledger -p "this year" --monthly --average balance ^expenses -f
> journal.ldg
> >
> > I've tried other variations like using reg, or setting -b flag instead
> of -p. But, doesn't seem to work.
> >
> > Any ideas, what's going wrong?
>
> I was literally doing this yesterday as well. I had the same problem. I
> "solved" it by doing the math manually.
>
> $ ledger -p "this year" balance ^expenses -f journal.ldg --amount "amount
> / 11.5"
>
> As I understand this redefines the amount displayed to be the original
> amount / 11.5. I chose 11.5 because we are approximately that far through
> the year.
>
> Let me know if that gives you logical values. My transactions are in about
> 12 currencies so I'm having trouble verifying them logically.
>
> This is also exposing a need for me to think about journal organization as
> some of these values are "polluted" with data that shouldn't be counted. I
> did conversion of data only back to 2016-01-01. The pollution is caused by
> my having categorized things like my 2015 tax payment as
> Expense:Tax:CZ:Income:2015. Not ideal in retrospect, I think. Still
> thinking it through.
>
> Regards,
>
> bex
>
>
> --
>
> ---
> 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.
>
>
> --
>
> ---
> 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