Re: Working with per-bank-account files

My understanding is that a comment (immediately) below the transaction is considered part of the posting above it, ie a posting comment. -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ledger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

> Tobias Pfeiffer writes: > works and shows a balance of "100 EUR" for "Expenses:A". The "uuid" tag is applied to postings, not to transactions. If you specify it before the first posting, it is applied to all the posting, giving the sense of "postings belonging to the

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

Hi, On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 14:59:07 -0300 Alexandre Rademaker wrote: > > On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:48:57 -0700 Martin Michlmayr wrote: > >> The other solution would be use to an UUID tag; if two transactions > >> have the same UUID, ledger will ignore one. > > > > Uh, for me this only works if the

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

Can you give an example? Not clear... Ab., Alexandre Rademaker http://arademaker.github.com > On Mar 21, 2016, at 9:52 AM, Tobias Pfeiffer wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:48:57 -0700 Martin Michlmayr wrote: >> The other solution would be use to an UUID tag;

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

Hi, On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:48:57 -0700 Martin Michlmayr wrote: > The other solution would be use to an UUID tag; if two transactions > have the same UUID, ledger will ignore one. Uh, for me this only works if the UUID tag is set *above* the postings... if the UUID tag is set below the postings,

Line numbers reported incorrectly for included files (was: Working with per-bank-account files)

Martin Michlmayr writes: > I use [one large ledger file] at the moment instead of include > directives because the latter doesn't show line numbers of the > included files properly when there are errors. Where can we see the bug report for that behaviour? -- \“There

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

I have an emacs script that reads the CSV files in. It is smart enough to know what asset account it is reading in and has limited abilities to fuess at an expense category I probably hand enter 5% of my transactions (~17 per day across all accounts) I would share the enacs code but ut is highly

Working with per-bank-account files

Hi, I wanted to ask the mailing list for a kind of "best practice" approach when working with multiple "physical" (that word doesn't fit at all, though) accounts, like bank, credit card, PayPal etc. To import data from the past into ledger, I have written scripts that read my account statements

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

* Tobias Pfeiffer [2016-03-17 23:55]: > - The entries are in correct date order within each file, but when I > combine them (either using multiple `-f` parameters or one file with > `include` directive) then they are not, so without extra sorting > parameters, `ledger

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

Hi Craig, On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 08:08:25 -0700 Craig Earls wrote: > I use one big file. > > My account tree looks like this: > > Assets:BankA:Checking > Assets:BankA:Savings > Assets:BankB:Savings So how do you get your data into that big file? Do you input the data by hand? Thanks Tobias --

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

I use one big file. My account tree looks like this: Assets:BankA:Checking Assets:BankA:Savings Assets:BankB:Savings On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:55 AM, Tobias Pfeiffer wrote: > Hi, > > I wanted to ask the mailing list for a kind of "best practice" approach > when working

Re: Working with per-bank-account files

Hi, On Thu, 17 Mar 2016 16:48:57 -0700 Martin Michlmayr wrote: > Tobias Pfeiffer [2016-03-17 23:55]: > > Therefore I considered to write a script that merges > > these files in the correct date order into some big "all.ledger" > > file. > > I use something similar at the

Re: Line numbers reported incorrectly for included files (was: Working with per-bank-account files)

* Ben Finney [2016-03-18 11:12]: > > I use [one large ledger file] at the moment instead of include > > directives because the latter doesn't show line numbers of the > > included files properly when there are errors. > > Where can we see the bug report for that