Lance,

Thanks for your thoughts...

> 2) The existing smart buckets are simply a subset of your
> transactions. If Kevin extends this to allow user-defined smart
> buckets, I'm sure he'd still want to limit them to querying for a
> subset of transactions. This would prevent us from implementing the
> checks you mention since we would need a way to query on money flows
> as well. Maybe Kevin can come up with something clever for us.

I wonder why would we need to query money flows.  Under the most  
advisable operation money flows should be a zero-sum transaction.   
When one bucket is increased, the other is decreased by the same  
amount.  Therefore, a bucket sum should accurately account for all  
money flows.  The only situation where this wouldn't be true is if a  
person were keeping track of two sets of cash-flow accounts and  
buckets in the same document (which I think would be really ill- 
advised).  If you had Husband cash-flow accounts with corresponding  
husband buckets and Wife cash-flow accounts with a distinct set of  
buckets, it would be possible to make a mess by creating money flows  
across husband/wife bucket lines and not transferring money  
correspondingly between husband/wife cash-flow accounts.  However, I  
think this situation is extremely rare and would be best best served  
by maintaining two documents with a loan account serving as a bridge  
between the two.

Was there another situation where you would want to query  money flows?

Grace to you,
Blair

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "No 
Thirst Software User Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to no-thirst-software@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
no-thirst-software+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/no-thirst-software?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to