On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 00:47 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> When I enter a value for a scheduled transaction the transaction is
> being created in the register (and in the review register) but both
> splits are empty:
This is fixed in r15940. Also, clicking OK in the SX editor no longer
results
On 04/18/2007 07:44 PM Josh Sled wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 13:48 -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
>>> it did open the data file but all of my transactions scheduled annually
>>> were converted to a January date. The day of the month is correct
> [...]
>> Ah, yeah, I see now... I broke this. I was
On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 13:48 -0400, Josh Sled wrote:
> > it did open the data file but all of my transactions scheduled annually
> > were converted to a January date. The day of the month is correct
[...]
> Ah, yeah, I see now... I broke this. I was trying to be crafty. :(
> I hope to have a fi
On 04/15/2007 01:48 PM Josh Sled wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 00:05 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
...
>> Coming back to the View button in the Edit Scheduled Transactions window
>> this is still not doing anything for me even with the latest version
>> using a complete new checkout from SVN.
>
On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 00:05 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> /home/venglisc/g2-test/test1.8.gc:199386: namespace error : Namespace
> prefix fs on day is not defined
> 20
I've seen this as well on 1.8 files without namespace decls. I'm not
quite sure what happened – if anything – with th
On 04/11/2007 09:30 AM Josh Sled wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 00:56 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
>> I've tried an older data file but saw the same problem. However, the
>> file may not have been old enough. I'll go searching on my backups to
>> find a file that's definitely old enough and t
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 00:56 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> I've tried an older data file but saw the same problem. However, the
> file may not have been old enough. I'll go searching on my backups to
> find a file that's definitely old enough and try again as soon as I have
> a little more t
On 04/08/2007 11:44 AM Josh Sled wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 10:55 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
>> Looking through my list of scheduled transactions it appears that all of
>> these transactions that were incorrectly set to January 1st were
>> originally entered to be scheduled annually. Si
On Sun, 2007-04-08 at 10:55 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> Looking through my list of scheduled transactions it appears that all of
> these transactions that were incorrectly set to January 1st were
> originally entered to be scheduled annually. Since the option to
> schedule a transaction a
On 03/15/2007 10:19 AM Josh Sled wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 01:59 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
>> Strange thing happened: It looks like some of my transactions were
>> incorrectly scheduled for Jan. 1st.
...
>
> Hmm, well that's wrong. I guess the handful of SXes I'm testing against
> are
>>> The weekly->daily case is unexpected, though.
I don't see the problem of the weekly->daily issue (a transaction
scheduled weekly being added daily) anymore with R15723.
However, the issue that a transaction that's being entered to the
register is not cleared from the next run and keeps bei
On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 01:59 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> Strange thing happened: It looks like some of my transactions were
> incorrectly scheduled for Jan. 1st.
> For instance, I have an annual subscription to a magazine scheduled as a
> reminder for Sept. 1st. This has now been included in
> Yup. Let me know if it's better @15723,
>
Strange thing happened: It looks like some of my transactions were
incorrectly scheduled for Jan. 1st.
For instance, I have an annual subscription to a magazine scheduled as a
reminder for Sept. 1st. This has now been included in the SLR list of
On Tue, 2007-03-13 at 01:18 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> On 03/12/2007 11:35 PM Josh Sled wrote:
>
> > The weekly->daily case is unexpected, though. Would you mind isolating
> > the XML for that SX and sending it over ... here or
> > privately?
>
> Is this what you are looking for?
>
>
On 03/12/2007 11:35 PM Josh Sled wrote:
...
> The weekly->daily case is unexpected, though. Would you mind isolating
> the XML for that SX and sending it over ... here or
> privately?
Is this what you are looking for?
508e34743f3f57e81b332ee866644c04
Volker Englisch
y
y
0
0
On Mon, 2007-03-12 at 22:42 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> I have the feeling just the content without the debug options will help you:
> * 22:15:28 CRIT g_date_set_julian: assertion
> `g_date_valid_julian (j)' failed
> This also explains why - as I noticed today - a transaction scheduled
> f
On 03/12/2007 08:47 PM Josh Sled wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 18:45 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
>> It seems the transactions that are either listed to be ignored or to be
>> created are not cleared from the SLR list and are displayed again the
>> next time the SLR runs. Here it doesn't matte
On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 18:45 -0400, Volker Englisch wrote:
> It seems the transactions that are either listed to be ignored or to be
> created are not cleared from the SLR list and are displayed again the
> next time the SLR runs. Here it doesn't matter if the SLR is started
> from the menu opti
On 03/07/2007 08:54 PM Josh Sled wrote:
> Fixed in r15687. Thanks again.
I think the fix in R15687 may have introduced another bug.
It seems the transactions that are either listed to be ignored or to be
created are not cleared from the SLR list and are displayed again the
next time the SLR r
19 matches
Mail list logo
