When I added address to check printing it originally took the default address from Vendor, Customer, or Employee objects, which are in business-core. ( 607522 in bugzilla ) However there is a build problem that I didn't see initially because of the way I was building. I removed that capability before submitting a patch based on a short discussion in IRC. My understanding is that it is an architecture issue.
There is a note regarding moving the business-core into the engine from late March in this mail list. Perhaps after 2.4. I think the architecture decision needs to be made before you can pull addresses from the business-core objects. Another minor issue is that it does happen occasionally that the 'make payable to' information is different from the company name. Regarding check numbers, assuming Mike's patch, think about what would happen in different usage scenarios. If one check is printed, torn off and sent, then there are two checks left on the page that would need to printed from the top with two checks on the first page. On the other hand if multiple 'print checks' were run, then the positions would be different. Some times I hand write a check, or they get damaged, or otherwise voided, etc. Also, there currently is no need to have the check number in the transaction before the checks are printed. When I was testing Mike's patch 621016, I tested it by using 'print' as the check number for all checks I wanted to print, then used that field to do the 'Find..' - some checks go missing? a print mis-feed? - no problem. There may be some issues with sort order in the register. This is mostly moot for me because I only use voucher checks. I'm starting to ramble. I think what you propose would work when it works, which is most of the time, but would be a real head scratcher if anything went wrong, and putting the adjustment in the preference dialog would make any fix far removed from the check printing process. Your point about the Date format is well taken. It could be included in the check format. But then what about the whole Custom tab? Isn't it for someone needing some adjustments for simple check writing that doesn't know how to write the check format files? Beats me. Its funny, but when I was looking at the preferences the way they are now, I thought they should be removed altogether. The ones that are there now ( date and blocking ) shouldn't apply to the whole check the way they do. I added options for the individual check fields, so now the preference options are really extraneous. Thats my .02. On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Jesse Weinstein <je...@wefu.org> wrote: > On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 23:35 -0400, Mike Alexander wrote: > > I just made some changes to check printing to allow more than one check > > to be printed per invocation. I can't check these in until after 2.4 > > is released because of the string freeze. > I was aware (and delighted by) your changes, and should have mentioned > that in my initial message. > > I would suggest that you > > wait until then before hacking at this code any more since otherwise > > merging the changes is going to be non-trivial. > Our two sets of changes are pretty distinct, and I feel confident that > yours will be accepted eventually, so I plan to first generate a patch > off trunk plus your changes, then backport it to the current trunk. > > Thanks for reminding me, > > Jesse Weinstein > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-devel mailing list > gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
