A Diumenge 09 Juny 2013 01:35:39, Cédric Krier va escriure: > On 09/06/13 00:01 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: > > A Dissabte 08 Juny 2013 11:17:08, Cédric Krier va escriure: > > > On 08/06/13 10:22 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: > > > > A Dissabte 08 Juny 2013 03:41:16, Cédric Krier va escriure: > > > > > On 08/06/13 00:39 +0200, Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: > > > > > > - The closing move: which takes makes that when closing the > > > > > > fiscal year all balance accounts will be zero. If an account has > > > > > > balance of +10, the account will be added in a move line with a > > > > > > -10, and so on. > > > > > > > > > > This is weird. > > > > > > > > This is Spain ;-) > > > > > > > > > > The result is that when the year is closed all accounts (P&L and > > > > > > balance) have a balance of zero. > > > > > > > > > > > > Then, the year is opened with the opening move, which looks like > > > > > > the closing one but with credit and debit exchanged. > > > > > > > > > > This process should not be done in Tryton. > > > > > Tryton is designed to defer automaticaly deferral accounts. > > > > > This is important for the follow for example of the payment of > > > > > invoices. > > > > > > > > It can be done because what we do in the closing/opening process is > > > > automatically reconcile the closing and opening move lines. > > > > > > So it is clearly a useless operation. > > > > AFAIU, listing a General Ledger when you don't have an opening moves it > > means that if you SUM the results of a given account, the result is not > > the real balance of the account because the application is adding some > > "magic" that when you query for the balance of the account it is able to > > query previous fiscal years. Is this correct? > > Yes. > > > > > > > What we do in Tryton is create three special periods: opening > > > > > > (first day of fiscal year), p&l (last day of fiscal year) and > > > > > > closing (last day of fiscal year), so the user is able to see > > > > > > their reports with or without the p&l period and with or without > > > > > > closing period. As closing and p&l start and end on the same > > > > > > date (usually Dec 31th), there's no way the correct order is > > > > > > used in reports. > > > > > > > > > > I don't see the point to see a report where all balance accounts > > > > > are zero. > > > > > > > > Yes, but you may want to see the report where all P&L are zero and > > > > currently there's no way to distinguish P&L and closing. That's why > > > > we cannot relay on date. > > > > > > But as there is no closing, there is nothing to distinguish. > > > > I'm checking with an accountant if those moves are required for legal > > needs. > > Come one, there will be no answer on this.
Believe me, I prefer not to implement this if not strictly necessary (though I would like to know I can implement it as a customer customization if one is stubborn enough) but I have doubts the opening move is not necessary . The reason is that in Spain one has to certify P&L + Balance Sheet + Trial Balance + General Ledger. I don't know if it is a problem if the sum of an account in the General Ledger does not match the Balance Sheet. > > It is probably subject to interpretation. But even if we can avoid the > > moves, I'm pretty sure many accountants will end up asking for this. > > We will not change Tryton because people don't understand it and want > useless behavior. > > > I think using a > > sequence is not a problem for companies without this special need and > > ensures that users can create those periods safely. > > I don't see where is the safety? > > > After all, Tryton already allows > > to create those periods but it simply has no way of sorting them > > correctly. > > I still don't see any need to sort periods differently excep we could > sort as second argument by name instead of id. That would be enough. -- Albert Cervera i Areny Consultor funcional Tel. 93 553 18 03 @albertnan www.NaN-tic.com Avís legal >>
