You or anyone for the case of existing vs. new.
Honestly, I haven't had any issue with the feature at all and over 90%
of my transactions are all touching the same source account so my list
is potentially very large. I've only found a handful of variant
spellings for payees, and corrected them right away. But apparently
mileage varies as there is a non-zero contingent that is having problems.
It *does* narrow down the list as you keep typing, perhaps folks are
expecting a 'begins with' search and don't like to type more than 2
characters?
I'd at least think a 'begins with' type search would be better, and more
like how the previous auto-fill worked.
I'm not opposed to an independent table of payees if that happens, but I
can imagine it being a mess eventually, and then requests for copying
lists to different account registers, or syncing them up, etc.
Regards,
Adrien
On 6/6/23 10:53 AM, David Carlson wrote:
Adrien,
Who are you asking to provide an example?
My point was that the manual editing method that you suggested couldn't be
used if the existing descriptions must be kept.
In my data file that is often the case.
I agree that there is a lot of 'noise' in the drop down list of suggestions
caused by searching existing transactions to populate this list.
I think that such a list would best be populated from an independent table
which would be entirely new to GnuCash. It could be called 'Payees' and it
should be independent for each account.
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
[email protected]
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
