On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:24 PM, Mike or Penny Novack <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The key is that the register would display date,time, AND TIMEZONE. The
>> timezone lets the user recognize that ...
>>
>>
>
> I am going to ask again.
>
> On July 18th at 14:30 EST the bookkeeper enters a
Meant to include the list.
--- On Fri, 7/18/08, David T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: David T. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: RFC: Timestamps/timezones proposal
> To: "Derek Atkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Friday, July 18, 2008, 4:53 PM
Mike or Penny Novack wrote:
>
>> The key is that the register would display date,time, AND TIMEZONE.
>> The timezone lets the user recognize that ...
>>
>>
>
> I am going to ask again.
>
> On July 18th at 14:30 EST the bookkeeper enters a transaction
> involving accounts whose "time zones"
>The key is that the register would display date,time, AND TIMEZONE. The
>timezone lets the user recognize that ...
>
>
I am going to ask again.
On July 18th at 14:30 EST the bookkeeper enters a transaction involving
accounts whose "time zones" are all also EST (in other words there wil
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Stuart D. Gathman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Charles Day wrote:
>
>> Under what circumstances would an end user ever choose the option
>>> "randomly
>>> change the dates on my transactions when I change the timezone on my
>>> machine"?
>>>
>>>
>> Tell me how thi
Charles Day wrote:
>> Under what circumstances would an end user ever choose the option "randomly
>> change the dates on my transactions when I change the timezone on my
>> machine"?
>>
> Tell me how this proposal would cause "random" date changes. Only the
> *display* of the timestamp changes
Quoting "David T." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Charles, I believe Graham is right on this. I can easily see the
> end-user scenario that he outlines, and I agree with him that the
> transaction date is a DATE. All the confusion about UTC, timezones,
> account settings and the such GO AWAY if the tra
this discussion,
I haven't seen a compelling reason to use a timestamp in this context.
--- On Fri, 7/18/08, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: RFC: Timestamps/timezones proposal
> To: "Charle
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Derek Atkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Charles Day wrote:
> >
> >> Tell me how this proposal would cause "random" date changes. Only
> >> the *display* of the timestamp changes, and only according to
> >> setting
Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Charles Day wrote:
>
>> Tell me how this proposal would cause "random" date changes. Only
>> the *display* of the timestamp changes, and only according to
>> settings that you pick yourself.
>
> Try this:
>
> Enter a transaction dated 1 March 2008 in an
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Mike Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --On July 18, 2008 7:18:06 PM +0200 Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> If a timestamp is used, it means that every single piece of time
>> related code, must correctly respect the account timezone, at all
>
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charles Day wrote:
>
> Tell me how this proposal would cause "random" date changes. Only the
>> *display* of the timestamp changes, and only according to settings that you
>> pick yourself.
>>
>
> Try this:
>
> Enter a
--On July 18, 2008 7:18:06 PM +0200 Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> If a timestamp is used, it means that every single piece of time
> related code, must correctly respect the account timezone, at all
> times moving forward during development.
>
> As soon as *one* developer at *any* t
Charles Day wrote:
Tell me how this proposal would cause "random" date changes. Only the
*display* of the timestamp changes, and only according to settings that
you pick yourself.
Try this:
Enter a transaction dated 1 March 2008 in an account with timezone
UTC+02, with its split in a second
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charles Day wrote:
>
> No, splits don't have posting dates or times. The entire transaction uses
>> a single timestamp. That's how it works now. Under this proposal, that
>> timestamp would only be *displayed* differentl
Charles Day wrote:
No, splits don't have posting dates or times. The entire transaction
uses a single timestamp. That's how it works now. Under this proposal,
that timestamp would only be *displayed* differently in different
registers, or not, according to your preference.
This is still very
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Charles Day wrote:
>>
>> ok, though what happens when the user decides to change the timezone for
account A? (eg. I ask the bank to transf
On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 3:46 AM, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charles Day wrote:
>
> ok, though what happens when the user decides to change the timezone for
>>> account A? (eg. I ask the bank to transfer my account from their Saint
>>> John's branch to their Vancouver branch, 5 ti
Charles Day wrote:
ok, though what happens when the user decides to change the timezone for
account A? (eg. I ask the bank to transfer my account from their Saint
John's branch to their Vancouver branch, 5 timezones apart?) What happens to
the timestamps and dates displayed then?
The timestamp
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Nathan Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On 7/17/08, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Nathan Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 4:04 PM, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 7/17/08, Charles Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Nathan Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> 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
>>> s
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:37 AM, Christian Stimming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 16. Juli 2008 22:04 schrieb Charles Day:
> > OK, here's an idea. I'm interested in seeing the reaction. Maybe it's
> > stupid, maybe not.
> >
> > 1. Store transaction timestamps in UTC.
>
> Transactions c
On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Nathan Buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 i
Am Mittwoch, 16. Juli 2008 22:04 schrieb Charles Day:
> OK, here's an idea. I'm interested in seeing the reaction. Maybe it's
> stupid, maybe not.
>
> 1. Store transaction timestamps in UTC.
Transactions currently store two timestamps, see
http://svn.gnucash.org/docs/HEAD/structtransaction__s.htm
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,
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
26 matches
Mail list logo
