[kmymoney] [Bug 439532] New: Option to not automatically/forcibly include payees/payers in address book

[MRib]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=439532

            Bug ID: 439532
           Summary: Option to not automatically/forcibly include
                    payees/payers in address book
           Product: kmymoney
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
                OS: Other
            Status: REPORTED
          Severity: wishlist
          Priority: NOR
         Component: general
          Assignee: kmymoney-devel at kde.org
          Reporter: Riban at gmx-topmail.de
  Target Milestone: ---

SUMMARY
It would be great if there was an option somewhere in the KMM preferences to
change the behaviour of KMM to not automatically/forcibly save payers/payees in
the address book.


CURRENT KMM BEHAVIOUR
When writng a name into the "Payer/Payee" field of a transaction, KMM
automatically shows a dialogue asking if this name should be added to the
address book. By clicking on "YES", the name is saved to the address book as a
new contact; by clicking "NO" the name is automatically deleted from the
"Payer/Payee" field of the transaction. It is not possible to have a
transaction with a name that is not in the address book.


WISH
An option in the KMM preferences that tells KMM to let the users write a Name
into the "Payer/Payee" field of a transaction without forcing the user to
create an address book entry for that payer/payee. In other words: Allow the
user to have transactions containing names in the "Payer/Payee" field that are
not in the address book.


EXEMPLARY SCENARIO AND BENEFITS
I buy and sell a lot of used items on various internet platforms and therefore
send and receive a lot of transactions from/to a lot of other people. But about
99% of the people I trade with are "once in a lifetime" or "one time" contacts,
meaning that I will have one transaction with them and then never again. But
still those names clutter my address book. Right now I have about 1400
contacts/names saved in my address book, but only 15 to 20 of them have
regularly/recurring transactions (like my health insurance company or my
employer).

Merging all of those "once in a lifetime" contacts into a "generic" contact
like "private seller/buyer" is not a good option, because then I lose the names
in case I need to search for a name at some point in the future.

Benefit 1: Allowing the user to have transactions containing names in the
"Payer/Payee" field that are not in the address book would declutter the
address book and help to keep the overview.

Benefit 2: I could have an address book entry of my close friend "John Doe" who
I have many transactions with. This "John Doe" can be separate from a
completely different "John Doe" who was a "one time" contact that I don't have
in my address book. This way I would never get confused with two different
people who have by accident the same names, because one (my friend) is in my
address book and the other (one time contact) is not.

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