Hi,
On Mittwoch, 16. Juli 2008, Charles Day wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> I agree, 1200UTC would prevent time zones from shifting transactions to
> another day. That would be a better d
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> >>
> >> Actually, except for GMT-12 or GMT+12, no, you do NOT need the time zone
> >>
Hi!
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, here's an idea. I'm interested in seeing the reaction. Maybe it's
> stupid, maybe not.
I havn't looked at the time code used in gnucash, so whatever I say is
entirely as an observer here. Generally I like the idea,
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>>> Actually, except for GMT-12 or GMT+12, no, you do NOT need the time zone
>>> to figu
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>>> Actually, except for GMT-12 or GMT+12, no, you do NOT need the time zone
>>> to figu
Quoting Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
>
>>
>> Actually, except for GMT-12 or GMT+12, no, you do NOT need the time zone
>> to figure out the date from 1200 UTC. However as I've said now three
>> times, GnuCash
Quoting Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Try the string "2008-04-11 00:02:00 +0200". Same timestamp. Different date.
* sigh *
Are you intentionally ignoring my repeated statement that we need
to CHANGE GNUCASH TO USE 1200Z? Let's try this example again with
that, and maybe we'll stop talk
Derek Atkins wrote:
This is where the "implicit TZ" comes in. For example, what's
the difference between "2008-04-10 18:02:00 -0400" and
"2008-04-10 15:02:00 -0700"? I would argue that there *is* no
difference. Both timestamps are talking about the exact same time.
And hey look, they both sa
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>
> Actually, except for GMT-12 or GMT+12, no, you do NOT need the time zone
> to figure out the date from 1200 UTC. However as I've said now three
> times, GnuCash doesn't use 1200 UTC currently, it uses local,
Quoting "Stuart D. Gathman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
>> You haven't looked at the data file recently, have you? Here's
>> an example from mine:
>>
>> 2008-04-10 18:02:00 -0400
>
> The issue here isn't the data file (which I assumed we all agreed
> incl
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Derek Atkins wrote:
> You haven't looked at the data file recently, have you? Here's
> an example from mine:
>
> 2008-04-10 18:02:00 -0400
The issue here isn't the data file (which I assumed we all agreed
included the needed info). The issue is that loading the
nice asc
Quoting "Stuart D. Gathman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> I agree, 1200UTC would prevent time zones from shifting transactions to
>>> another day. That would be a better default than local. That
>>> could work
>>> for default price times as well (see but 541970).
>
> Storing timestamps for dates
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Phil Longstaff wrote:
It is actually the case that (depending on financial policies) storing
the actual time could present problems.
I've had to deal with many such problems in a commercial system using
timestamps for dates. I ended up creating an XLNDate type to c
OK, here's an idea. I'm interested in seeing the reaction. Maybe it's
stupid, maybe not.
1. Store transaction timestamps in UTC.
2. Set a timezone for each account.
3. In account registers, the transaction date is displayed according to that
account's timezone.
4. In account registers, entering/al
Derek Atkins wrote:
Yes, but how would you like it if we forced the issue and the way
GnuCash did it was NOT the way you needed it done? Wouldn't you
prefer to be able to set it up for your particular locale in the
way YOU need it to be done?
I've worked in finance for a long time (first insu
Quoting Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Derek Atkins wrote:
>
>> These rules can certainly vary from place to place, locale to locale,
>> or even person to person. Why force the issue?
>
> Because the consequences can be expensive.
Yes, but how would you like it if we forced the issue and
Derek Atkins wrote:
These rules can certainly vary from place to place, locale to locale,
or even person to person. Why force the issue?
Because the consequences can be expensive.
I was lucky in that I found and located the source of the problem
relatively quickly. Had I not found it, I wo
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:59 AM, Phil Longstaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Charles Day wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>> I would pay close attention to what Graham says here.
>
Charles Day wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> I would pay close attention to what Graham says here.
>>>
I didn't say that *all* timestamps were unnecessary, what I said was
that d
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > I would pay close attention to what Graham says here.
>> >
>> >> I didn't say that *
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:47 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I would pay close attention to what Graham says here.
> >
> >> I didn't say that *all* timestamps were unnecessary, what I said was
> >> that dates that are actually da
Mike or Penny Novack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would pay close attention to what Graham says here.
>
>> I didn't say that *all* timestamps were unnecessary, what I said was
>> that dates that are actually dates, and not times, are being stored
>> as times, and that this is incorrect.
>>
>> F
22 matches
Mail list logo
