[Kmymoney-devel] Consistency Check for opening dates

[Jack]

On 2015.10.21 16:55, aga wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> On 21/10/15 20:08, Christian Dávid wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> for a while now I receive such consistency check errors:
>> 
>>    * Transaction 'T000000000000000112' has a post date '⟨date⟩'  
>> before one of
>> the referenced account's opening date.
>>      Referenced accounts: ⟨account name⟩
>>      The post date was not updated to '⟨date from above +3 days⟩'.
>> […]
>> Finished: 0 problems corrected. 2 problems still present.
>> 
>> I think this error is not useful for the user. Mainly because the  
>> long id is
>> shown – to normal users this is the only place to meet this id, so  
>> it is
>> absolutely useless. We should change that (I can do that).
>> 
>> However, I wanted to ask if we should stick to this message?  
>> KMyMoney can
>> handle this situation very well, so why should we care?
> 
> Would KMyMoney know which of the two dates the user would choose to  
> alter?  The liklihood I suppose is that it is the opening date, but  
> it's possible that that is not what the user would have wanted.  It  
> could be that he has actually entered an obviously wrong date for a  
> transaction.
> 
Let's remember there are two separate issues here.  First, is that  
T000000000012 is meaningless to most users, and it would be good to  
provide the actual account name.  Separate is whether KMM should  
automatically alter either of the dates.  I believe that has already  
been discussed - but without any final conclusion.  As a wishlist  
proposal, it would be great if for each such transaction, the user  
could be given a choice of 1) alter the opening date, 2) alter the  
transaction date, or 3) do nothing (allowing manual editing later.  The  
problem with any of that is that the consistency check is not currently  
interactive.  Would it be possible/reasonable to leave the consistency  
check alone, and create a separate function to check for this specific  
issue, with an interactive means to resolve the issues found.  The  
consistency checker could then call this new function, perhaps with a  
parameter to say report only, no interaction.

Jack

For me, what would actually be most helpful would be an easy way to  
find those transactions later, without having to copy/paste/save the  
consistency check output.