Patrik Lermon wrote: > On 8/20/07, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Underlying assumptions in the business features that Invoices are always >> on sign and Payments are always the other. A negative payment would >> therefore look like an Invoice.. but it's NOT an invoice.. And it would >> confuse the payment-merging processing for handling over/under-payments >> across multiple invoices. >> > I think that assumption is actually wrong. > I mean, credit invoices are a rather common way to solve when you accidentally > invoiced someone, or invoiced the wrong amount etc. > > /Patrik I must agree with Patrik. Mistakes do happen, and in a real, cold harsh world of accounting you just do not delete mistaken invoices, you do not cover them with shadow payment, you credit them.
As for the abovementioned payment-merging process, this is in itself an architectural mistake that has to be overwritten sooner or later. Multiple-payment system that does not allow for picking non-consequential invoices to be paid just does not survive in a real life very long. Negative payment should never look like invoice, but exactly what it is, negative payment, correction of a mistake. The same applies to negative invoice. I quite understand, that Gnucash is in a painful transition process from personal finance program to SMB accounting program and such glitches are obviously a burden of its past. Maybe 3.0? 4.0? Wahur _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
