[kmymoney4] [Bug 342401] allow splits on payees

[harry bennett via KDE Bugzilla]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342401

--- Comment #5 from harry bennett  ---
Sure.
Christian hands me a check for services ($500).
Jack hands me a check for services ($1000).
Both of these checks may land into the same category (1099 income, in my case).
I walk into the bank and make a single combined deposit for $1500. This is what
my deposit receipt and bank statement will show, and also how I would enter it
in my checkbook ledger (KMM).

If I enter it as 2 separate transactions, It becomes correct from the payee
perspective, but I lose transaction "correctness" in the checkbook ledger. 

Whereas if I were to leave the payee field blank, and enter the deposit as a
split transaction, the entry in the bank ledger would simply read "split
transaction" (and it does, by the way) showing the summed total of the splits
(as any other split would do), but I would have payee fields where I could
assign respective amounts.

I am unfamiliar with "proper" bookkeeping/accounting procedures. I am just a
lay person that is self-employed trying to keep his books straight. It just
seemed logical to me that if we can have splits, we should be able to do this
as well.

This was discovered when I tried reconciling payees against 1099's. I had one
that was $600 high and one $600 low. I came to realize that I "credited" an
entire deposit to a single payee (having forgotten that the deposit was
actually 2 checks). My next thought was "oh, I should split that". And now here
I am.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[kmymoney4] [Bug 342401] allow splits on payees

[Christian David via KDE Bugzilla]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342401

Christian David  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||christian-da...@web.de

--- Comment #4 from Christian David  ---
Changing this is a design decision. For me a transaction can have only one
payee by definition. Otherwise this are multiple transactions.

Do you have an example for such a transaction? Maybe someone with more
knowledge of bookkeeping can help here.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[kmymoney4] [Bug 342401] allow splits on payees

[harry bennett via KDE Bugzilla]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342401

--- Comment #1 from harry bennett  ---
a year has gone by and this is still "unconfirmed"?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[kmymoney4] [Bug 342401] allow splits on payees

[Jack via KDE Bugzilla]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342401

--- Comment #2 from Jack  ---
It looks like less than a quarter of the wishlist items are confirmed.  I don'
think this really has any particular meaning or importance - other than perhaps
a developer will confirm an item as an unofficial way of increasing the
priority.  As has been said on the mailing list, developer time is rather
scarce, and the current priority is conversion to Frameworks.  Once that is
complete (and there is no timeline yet) there may be more attention to fixing
remaining bugs, and then to addressing wishlist items.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[kmymoney4] [Bug 342401] allow splits on payees

[harry bennett via KDE Bugzilla]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=342401

--- Comment #3 from harry bennett  ---
Jack, thanks for the reply. Totally understand the time thing.

To All, Just to be clear I wasn't really expecting it to be fixed, I generally
take "confirmed" as "someone read this" and hopefully, put it on the todo
list.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.