MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

44 posts
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled
User avatar
stef145g
MMEX Developer

Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:40 pm
Location: Canberra, Australia
lotsofjunk wrote:1. You have a balance
2. When you have a withdrawl on the ledger line : Balance - with drawl = new balance.
Unfortunately I am attacking this issue as a programmer, and I agree with your definition, of which other views did not conform to this definition.

Before I made the changes, others also brought to our attention that the balances were incorrect in some views.
For the un-reconciled view, my issue was raised that the report is either:
1. A ledger of un-reconciled transactions.
2. A general ledger with a view showing the unreconciled transactions.

I chose option 2, because to me, I concidered it to be logical, especially with the introduction of the transaction filter.

Not being a financial person, I don't understand the reason for showing unreconciled balances as a ledger as you require.
Regards: Stefano
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

lotsofjunk
New MMEX User

Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:59 pm
Thanks for the answer.

But I still recomend that the current unreconciled view is not working the way a single line ledger should work and it should be corrected or deleted.

It is much worse to display wrong information than not display information.
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

GregChapman
Super MMEX User

Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:24 am
Location: Norfolk Broads, UK
lotsofjunk wrote:I undersand your position, but it is incorrect for a ledger!
I don't think there is any difference between us when it comes to ledgers. The difference is in what the filter is doing.

In 1970s terms, your concept of MMEx's ledger filter is that of using Tipp-Ex to obliterate an entry AND all following balance entries so you can re-calculate and re-write a corrected ledger, but then use the magic of computers to remove all that Tipp-Ex. You see MMEx's filter as a ledger re-write.

Forget Tipp-Ex. Think Highlighter Pen.

The ledger is NOT re-written and re-calculated. All the original entries remain in place - so no balance will change - it's just that it temporarily only shows highlighted entries.

Stick with 0.9.8.0 by all means, if it works for you, but if you do need to update you'll have to come to terms with MMEx's "highlighter" and use the Report facility to get an equivalent of the display you seek.
Greg Chapman
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

lotsofjunk
New MMEX User

Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:59 pm
In 2012 terms, you answer is British BS.

Filters or highlighters you can't justify displaying wrong calculations.

.0.9.8.0, worked correclty and I don't need some BS about highlighters!

1. Credit Entry : Balance + Credit = New Balance
2. Debit Entry : Balance - Debit = New Balance

If you highlight what you have done in .0.9.9.0 from the images I have attached, you would notice that the math does not add up.

.0.9.8.0. for Me!
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

lotsofjunk
New MMEX User

Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:59 pm
Once again thanks for you answer, Here is the short answer and I have attached a pdf document with the long answer and an example.

1. The view all - is a check book ledger sorted in the order that the transaction started or entered into the ledger.
2. The view un-reconcilded is a view in the order that the bank cleared the tranaction (reconciled) and this view has always matched by statement line for line.
Attachments
ledger.pdf
(37.81 KiB) Downloaded 193 times
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled
User avatar
stef145g
MMEX Developer

Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:40 pm
Location: Canberra, Australia
stef145g wrote:Unfortunately I am attacking this issue as a programmer
and as such I need to understand the problem before I can formulate a solution, This is the reason for getting others to test the program and provide feedback to ensure that we get it right.
lotsofjunk wrote:Here is the short answer and I have attached a pdf document with the long answer and an example.
Thanks for taking the time to explain the concept, as now I understand the reason for it, and makes sense.

From what you are saying, the View Un-Reconciled, should recalculate all the balances for this view. Should this be done for all these other views: View Reconciled, View All Except Reconciled, View Void, Flagged and Duplicates.

The view Transactions items should keep the balances of the general ledger intact which it was not doing.

When it comes to the transaction filter usage, I would prefer not to have the balances recalculated when different statuses are required. (This would also provide a solution to my initial issue.)
Regards: Stefano
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

lotsofjunk
New MMEX User

Posts: 19
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 5:59 pm
lotsofjunk wrote:Thanks stef145g, Really appreciate you efforts. Just for info, I have worked with the RAAF Magpies in the past and really impressed with Australia.


I beleive that the View all (primary ledger) should allways be in the orginal entry form. It needs to be a history of transactions and an accurate running balance. All verions of Money Manager EX verisons that I have used has done this exceptionly well.

I only use the View all and view Un-Reconciled, so I really can't speak for the other views.

stef145g wrote:From what you are saying, the View Un-Reconciled, should recalculate all the balances for this view.

My opnion, but I am pretty positive that to display in a ledger format, there is no other option, but to recalculate balances.

Just a question, but are the concerns with the balances not matching because people are confusing balance (view all - ledger) with re-conciled balance (View Un-Reconciled)?
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

Nikolay
MMEX Developer

Posts: 2262
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 8:27 am
Location: Sankt-Petersburg, Russia
My suggestion to add a button before an account name

Image ABC Bank

If the button pressed (or became in focus) some info screen appears.

A line with balances info that is under transactions list may be removed.
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled
User avatar
stef145g
MMEX Developer

Posts: 278
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2010 9:40 pm
Location: Canberra, Australia
I have built the .exe file for Windows at revision 3107 for testing.
Available for downloading on Sourceforge.net: https://sourceforge.net/projects/moneym ... _unstable/

This changes the way that the balances are calculated for:
1. View Reconciled
2. View UnReconciled
3. View All except Reconciled.

Note: This is only the EXE file and should replace the existing file in the SVN-3085 installation.
Regards: Stefano
Re: MoneyManagerEX_SVN-3085 - Major mistake in Un-Reconciled

GregChapman
Super MMEX User

Posts: 91
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:24 am
Location: Norfolk Broads, UK
Mmm! Having read the ledger.pdf file, I'm not sure that it explains anything, except to re-state the point that a bank's records will be different from your own, which we all realise.

It comes down to the basic concept behind the program.

It doesn't strike me as odd that MMEx holds MY ledger and when reconciling entries with someone else's records there will be differences in the balance shown for any particular date.

It seems that earlier versions of MMEx had the assumption that MMEx was trying to keep a duplicate of the BANK's ledger. If that's the case then I recognise there might be a need to do recalculations when hiding certain transactions.

However, I assume that like the paper records I held before I computerised my own accounts, my accounting program was recording MY ledger - not someone else's. When I mark transactions as reconciled it is only the transaction that I'm interested in NOT the balance, as I fully recognise that the bank's balance cannot be expected to keep in step with MY records. The balance column is redundant and I would argue that there's no point in showing it at all - then this issue goes away.

As I said before, if you want an indication of the running total of transactions outstanding at the bank, you turn to MMEx's reports facility. What else is relevant if MMEx is recording MY ledgers?
Greg Chapman
Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests