Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com writes:
Mike,
Yes that was correct, I have had a rethink and made some changes which are
in bug 700125 to allow the update on the sub account view. It is dependent
on the account selected, if it is a place holder or a placeholder some
where below it it will
Mike,
Yes that was correct, I have had a rethink and made some changes which are
in bug 700125 to allow the update on the sub account view. It is dependent
on the account selected, if it is a place holder or a placeholder some
where below it it will be read only. Also, as I am requiring default
OK, I've played with this some more and have a few comments. See below.
--On May 11, 2013 6:04:52 PM +0100 Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Mike,
Yes that was correct, I have had a rethink and made some changes
which are in bug 700125 to allow the update on the sub account view.
It
On Monday 06 May 2013 08:32:02 David Carlson wrote:
On 5/5/2013 3:25 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
Alex,
There is only one header row but the titles change depending on which row
you are on in the register. This is deliberate to utilises the sort model.
I did not think it was necessary
On 5/10/2013 3:31 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
On Monday 06 May 2013 08:32:02 David Carlson wrote:
On 5/5/2013 3:25 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
Alex,
There is only one header row but the titles change depending on
which row
you are on in the register. This is deliberate to utilises
On Friday 10 May 2013 07:04:23 David Carlson wrote:
On 5/10/2013 3:31 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
Why do you want the new register to bevisibly different ?
Geert
Well, to start off, so that I can tell while testing that I am
actually looking at a
On 5/10/2013 7:48 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
On Friday 10 May 2013 07:04:23 David Carlson wrote:
On 5/10/2013 3:31 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:
Why do you want the new register to bevisibly different ?
Geert
Well, to start off, so that I can tell while testing
David,
Not sure about the schedule problem you have, I have tried it on my XP VM
and I am unable to reproduce but will try different options.
The opening of an account in the sub-account view should be read only and I
have fixed this locally and will upload the patch along with some other
On 5/9/2013 8:53 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
David,
Not sure about the schedule problem you have, I have tried it on my XP VM
and I am unable to reproduce but will try different options.
The opening of an account in the sub-account view should be read only and I
have fixed this locally and
On 5/9/2013 12:12 PM, David Carlson wrote:
On 5/9/2013 8:53 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
David,
Not sure about the schedule problem you have, I have tried it on my XP VM
and I am unable to reproduce but will try different options.
The opening of an account in the sub-account view should be read
--On May 9, 2013 2:53:50 PM +0100 Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com
wrote:
The opening of an account in the sub-account view should be read only
and I have fixed this locally and will upload the patch along with
some other changes at the weekend.
I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean that
On 5/9/2013 2:25 PM, Mike Alexander wrote:
--On May 9, 2013 2:53:50 PM +0100 Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com
wrote:
The opening of an account in the sub-account view should be read only
and I have fixed this locally and will upload the patch along with
some other changes at the weekend.
On 5/6/2013 8:32 AM, David Carlson wrote:
On 5/5/2013 3:25 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
Alex,
There is only one header row but the titles change depending on which row
you are on in the register. This is deliberate to utilises the sort model.
I did not think it was necessary to have the extra
David,
Thank you for testing, I am a little confused by your last update. As I
have pointed out on the bug mentioned, I am only interested in the new
registers which all have the vertical status line and the columns can be
moved so you can move it at your pleasure.
Sub account registers do not
On 5/8/2013 10:07 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
David,
Thank you for testing, I am a little confused by your last update. As I
have pointed out on the bug mentioned, I am only interested in the new
registers which all have the vertical status line and the columns can be
moved so you can move it
On 5/8/2013 1:37 PM, David Carlson wrote:
On 5/8/2013 10:07 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
David,
Thank you for testing, I am a little confused by your last update. As I
have pointed out on the bug mentioned, I am only interested in the new
registers which all have the vertical status line and the
On 5/5/2013 3:25 AM, Robert Fewell wrote:
Alex,
There is only one header row but the titles change depending on which row
you are on in the register. This is deliberate to utilises the sort model.
I did not think it was necessary to have the extra number on the
transaction row, just looked
Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com writes:
At the moment it is just the Account registers that use the new interface,
I am looking at changing the business options to use the same thing.
Thanks!
Robert
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member,
Alex,
There is only one header row but the titles change depending on which row
you are on in the register. This is deliberate to utilises the sort model.
I did not think it was necessary to have the extra number on the
transaction row, just looked a bit cluttered so have left it out. If you
On Friday 03 May 2013 19:37:02 Robert Fewell wrote:
I have added a patch on bug 699614 which should change the defaults as
requested.
Regards,
Robert.
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
On May 4, 2013, at 12:53 AM, Geert Janssens janssens-ge...@telenet.be wrote:
On Friday 03 May 2013 19:37:02 Robert Fewell wrote:
I have added a patch on bug 699614 which should change the defaults as
requested.
Regards,
Robert.
___
Robert,
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 1:34 AM, Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com
To: gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
Cc:
Date: Fri, 3 May 2013 19:37:02 +0100
Subject: Time for 2.5.1
I have added a patch on bug 699614 which should change the defaults
On Thursday 02 May 2013 11:41:58 John Ralls wrote:
It's a new month and time for a new release of the 2.5 series. I propose to
tag on Saturday around noon PDT (1700Z). Is there anything that needs doing
to get ready? In particular, is the Win32 build issue fixed?
Regards,
John Ralls
The
On May 3, 2013, at 5:36 AM, Geert Janssens janssens-ge...@telenet.be wrote:
On Thursday 02 May 2013 11:41:58 John Ralls wrote:
It's a new month and time for a new release of the 2.5 series. I propose to
tag on Saturday around noon PDT (1700Z). Is there anything that needs doing
to get
On Friday 03 May 2013 07:50:59 John Ralls wrote:
Derek launched a trunk build yesterday and it completed and copied to Code, so
maybe it will
be OK. Your changes this morning were too late to trip a rebuild, so we'll have
to see if it
completes on its own tomorrow morning. Derek also set
I have added a patch on bug 699614 which should change the defaults as
requested.
Regards,
Robert.
___
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
Robert,
Robert Fewell 14ubo...@gmail.com writes:
I have added a patch on bug 699614 which should change the defaults as
requested.
Does this change the Business/Invoice register to use the new register
code, too, or just Account registers? (I'm just curious)
Regards,
Robert.
-derek
--
Robert,
Robert Fewell 14ubobit at gmail.com
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel writes:
* I have added a patch on bug 699614 which should change the defaults as**
requested.*
Does this change the Business/Invoice register to use the new register
code, too, or just Account
It's a new month and time for a new release of the 2.5 series. I propose to tag
on Saturday around noon PDT (1700Z). Is there anything that needs doing to get
ready? In particular, is the Win32 build issue fixed?
Regards,
John Ralls
___
29 matches
Mail list logo
