[kmymoney4] [Bug 361021] CSV importer: The transaction has missing assignment of...

[NSLW via KDE Bugzilla]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=361021

--- Comment #11 from NSLW <lukasz.wojnilowicz at gmail.com> ---
(In reply to allan from comment #10)
> (In reply to NSLW from comment #9)
> > (In reply to allan from comment #8)
> > > (In reply to NSLW from comment #0)
> > > > Buy transactions imported by CSV importer always have missing assignment
> > > 
> > > It's not correct to say that they '...always have missing assignment'  it is
> > > only under certain conditions.
> > 
> > For me it always has missing assignment during import from CSV and empty
> > ledger. Do you know conditions under which it doesn't happen?
> 
> Yes.  Often, the problem is that a Buy/Sell/ReinvDiv, which involve funds
> transfers, does not have the name of the relevant checking/brokerage account
> provided.  During CSV import of these types, an extra dialog opens that asks
> for the name of the checking/brokerage account that is to be used.  If this
> is correctly entered, then the transaction is not unbalanced. In general, I
> do not have a problem, over many years,  with missing assignments.

I enter the name of checking/brokerage account always correctly and only once
for every CSV file. I always have wrong amounts, even for transactions that
show as balanced.
Can you provide investment statement, you don't have problems with?

> > (In reply to allan from comment #7)
> > > There is also another issue, with fees sometimes getting the wrong sign,
> > > which I identified in https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=360129.  I think
> > > the patch in this current bug may be related.
> > 
> > According to my research bug #360129 can be independently fixed from this
> > bug and this bug can be independently fixed from bug #360129.
> > Moreover through simple sign changes in my patch I can cause both operations
> > to display warning about assignment and not only for sell operations.
> > How do you see them correlated?
> 
> I don't see the two bugs as related, except that
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=361029 highlighted the fee sign issue. 
> I'm assuming/hoping that your patch here is for that same problem.  I
> haven't yet had a chance to look into it.

Yes, that's the same issue but the other report supposed to concern other bug,
so patch for this bug doesn't fix the other bug.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.