sql-ledger-users — SQL-Ledger users

[SL] Non-billable hours

[Yves L. ing. <yve...@gm...>]

Hi All,

Non-billable hours cannot be charged but they must be paid to employees. 
How do you manage this?
Using a dedicated project with non-billable hours was my first try, but 
currently there is no way to retrieve the hours entered in the db. The 2 
owners have spent, and still do, many hours structuring the compagny, 
doing administrative tasks,... This is a debt for the company and those 
should be paid somewhen. How can I do this?

Thanks,

Yves Lavoie

Re: [SL] SL: Receiving Product - value of inventory not changing, yet quantity in stock does?

[David B. <dav...@sb...>]

It's been my experience that this is how accrual accounting systems
work.  I have no experience with cash accounting systems.  When I am
preparing my "Month End" figures, I perform what I consider an "Open
Receiving Report" which calculates the value of what has been received
but has not had a vendor invoice booked against it.  Run an Inventory
Valuation report (all items or parts, line totals and what not)...this
figure minus the open receiving value should equal your balance sheet
inventory.  If it does not an adjustment may be in order.

David Boyle

On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 14:31 -0700, je...@ix... wrote:
> It should though, my exact situation was we received the product on the
> last day of May, and the invoice from our vendor hasn't arrived in the mail
> yet. What do I do with my Balance Sheet? My inventory is understated by
> 150k at least.
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:14:28 +0000, David Boyle <dav...@sb...>
> wrote:
> > Inventory value does not increase until you book a vendor invoice
> > against the PO.
> > 
> > On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 14:03 -0700, je...@ix... wrote:
> >> This is a strange situation.
> >>
> >> We created a purchase order for some product. Today we received the
> >> product.
> >> I see that our quantity received, has increased by the correct amount,
> >> however the value of our inventory has not changed. The PO is currently
> >> open.
> >>
> >> Why would my inventory value not increase?
> >>
> >>
> >> The part looks correctly setup, inventory to the inventory account,
> > income
> >> to our sales account, and expense to cost of goods sold expense account.
> >>
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
> >> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the
> > latest
> >> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
> >> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
> >> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> >> sql...@li...
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
> > 
> > 
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
> > looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest
> > innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
> > enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
> > Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> > _______________________________________________
> > sql-ledger-users mailing list
> > sql...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises 
> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest 
> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and 
> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization. 
> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Receiving Product - value of inventory not changing, yet quantity in stock does?

[Michael H. <mh...@it...>]

When you receive the part(s) you enter them into the PO as received.   
If the entire order was received the PO will close itself and a  
vendor invoice will be created.
    If it was a partial order a vendor invoice will be created in the  
amount that was received and the PO will close and recreate itself  
for whatever is still waiting delivery.
    Either way the key is getting your received goods punched into  
the PO and posted, the rest is automatic.  ("Try it!  You'll like  
it!"  :)


Thanks,

Michael


On Jun 1, 2009, at 2:31 PM, <je...@ix...> wrote:

It should though, my exact situation was we received the product on the
last day of May, and the invoice from our vendor hasn't arrived in  
the mail
yet. What do I do with my Balance Sheet? My inventory is understated by
150k at least.

Jeff


On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:14:28 +0000, David Boyle <david- 
bo...@sb...>
wrote:
> Inventory value does not increase until you book a vendor invoice
> against the PO.
>
> On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 14:03 -0700, je...@ix... wrote:
>> This is a strange situation.
>>
>> We created a purchase order for some product. Today we received the
>> product.
>> I see that our quantity received, has increased by the correct  
>> amount,
>> however the value of our inventory has not changed. The PO is  
>> currently
>> open.
>>
>> Why would my inventory value not increase?
>>
>>
>> The part looks correctly setup, inventory to the inventory account,
> income
>> to our sales account, and expense to cost of goods sold expense  
>> account.
>>
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
>> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for  
>> enterprises
>> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the
> latest
>> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy  
>> and
>> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
>> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
>> _______________________________________________
>> sql-ledger-users mailing list
>> sql...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the  
> latest
> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users


------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the  
latest
innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
_______________________________________________
sql-ledger-users mailing list
sql...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

[SL] Re: SL: Receiving Product - value of inventory not changing,yet quantity in stock does?

[<je...@ix...>]

It should though, my exact situation was we received the product on the
last day of May, and the invoice from our vendor hasn't arrived in the mail
yet. What do I do with my Balance Sheet? My inventory is understated by
150k at least.

Jeff


On Mon, 01 Jun 2009 21:14:28 +0000, David Boyle <dav...@sb...>
wrote:
> Inventory value does not increase until you book a vendor invoice
> against the PO.
> 
> On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 14:03 -0700, je...@ix... wrote:
>> This is a strange situation.
>>
>> We created a purchase order for some product. Today we received the
>> product.
>> I see that our quantity received, has increased by the correct amount,
>> however the value of our inventory has not changed. The PO is currently
>> open.
>>
>> Why would my inventory value not increase?
>>
>>
>> The part looks correctly setup, inventory to the inventory account,
> income
>> to our sales account, and expense to cost of goods sold expense account.
>>
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
>> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the
> latest
>> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
>> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
>> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
>> _______________________________________________
>> sql-ledger-users mailing list
>> sql...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
> 
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest
> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Receiving Product - value of inventory not changing, yet quantity in stock does?

[David B. <dav...@sb...>]

Inventory value does not increase until you book a vendor invoice
against the PO.

On Mon, 2009-06-01 at 14:03 -0700, je...@ix... wrote:
> This is a strange situation.
> 
> We created a purchase order for some product. Today we received the
> product.
> I see that our quantity received, has increased by the correct amount,
> however the value of our inventory has not changed. The PO is currently
> open.
> 
> Why would my inventory value not increase?
> 
> 
> The part looks correctly setup, inventory to the inventory account, income
> to our sales account, and expense to cost of goods sold expense account.
> 
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises 
> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest 
> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and 
> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization. 
> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Receiving Product - value of inventory not changing, yet quantity in stock does?

[<la...@cl...>]

probably need to post the vendor invoice to record the AP and inventory. tim

>
> This is a strange situation.
>
> We created a purchase order for some product. Today we received the
> product.
> I see that our quantity received, has increased by the correct amount,
> however the value of our inventory has not changed. The PO is currently
> open.
>
> Why would my inventory value not increase?
>
>
> The part looks correctly setup, inventory to the inventory account, income
> to our sales account, and expense to cost of goods sold expense account.
>
>
> Jeff
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> OpenSolaris 2009.06 is a cutting edge operating system for enterprises
> looking to deploy the next generation of Solaris that includes the latest
> innovations from Sun and the OpenSource community. Download a copy and
> enjoy capabilities such as Networking, Storage and Virtualization.
> Go to: http://p.sf.net/sfu/opensolaris-get
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>

[SL] SL: Receiving Product - value of inventory not changing, yet quantity in stock does?

[<je...@ix...>]

This is a strange situation.

We created a purchase order for some product. Today we received the
product.
I see that our quantity received, has increased by the correct amount,
however the value of our inventory has not changed. The PO is currently
open.

Why would my inventory value not increase?


The part looks correctly setup, inventory to the inventory account, income
to our sales account, and expense to cost of goods sold expense account.


Jeff

Re: [SL] Edit shipping data

[R. Q. <rq...@gm...>]

i made a mistake in the entry of the qty shipped so in the invoice the
values were not correct.
however I went around it by writing a new sale order and entering the
shipping records all over again.

Thanks
Robert

Michael Hasse wrote:
> In a literal sense, yes, since the database on the back end can  
> always be accessed directly.  But that might not be the most  
> convenient solution.  What's the scenario - can you describe an  
> example case where this is being needed?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
>
> On May 12, 2009, at 3:25 PM, R. Quansah wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to edit and correct shipping data?
>
> regards
> Robert
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
> ------
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but  
> thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW  
> KODAK i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image 
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
>   

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Michael H. <mh...@it...>]

We work with a number of small businesses here in the US, including  
accounting firms, and every single one of them compares the bank  
statement because the banks don't always get the check scanned in  
properly!  So I'm not sure where this "the check is in the mail"  
being good enough is coming from.  (If anything that phrase tends to  
be a bit of dark humor implying that it most definitely is NOT in the  
mail.  :)
    But back to the topic at hand, I think pretty much any business  
in any country does in fact have some system of checks and balances  
(literally!) to ensure that what the books say matches reality.   
Taxation may vary as much as the lawmakers can invent, and so can  
payment methodologies and tracking thereof, but at the end of the day  
there isn't a business owner out there who doesn't verify that they  
really did get that dollar!


Thanks,

Michael


On May 15, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Paul Tammes wrote:

The whole concept of Bank Statements seems European to me, US  
citizens use
checks and reconciliation instead iirc.
I think the concept that reconciliation should match the bank statements
like Dieter mentioned is solid and was long overdue.

However, it might take some thinking and reconsidering to get the  
basic idea
across to people who are not used to check statements and live with  
messages
like ´the check is in the mail´. That way of accounting was part of the
start of the worldwide mess we have right now to begin with. If the  
check is
mentioned in the statement, it is in. And can be reconciled with the
statement number and invoice number as unique identifier. If not, we  
might
have a bad debt (or mortgage) on our hands.


2009/5/15 Dieter Simader <dsi...@sq...>

> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Hamish Bain wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
>>> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these  
>>> transactions
>>> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user
> error,
>>> well, then fix up your own f'up.
>>
>> It would be interesting to know why you didn't reply to me on your  
>> Forum,
> as
>> a 'paid-up' member of SQL-Ledger since I started using it 3-4  
>> years ago,
> and
>> tell me I screwed up, and to fix my own f'up.  Or else at least  
>> make some
>> attempt to see if it might be a bug?
>
> Why should I hunt for a bug, just because you don't get it?
>
> I replied to your request with a detailed explaination of what you  
> have to
> do. What more do you need?
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
> for externally facing server and web deployment.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
for externally facing server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
_______________________________________________
sql-ledger-users mailing list
sql...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Hamish B. <hw...@be...>]

On Sat, 16 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Hamish Bain wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
> >> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions
> >> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user
> >> error, well, then fix up your own f'up.
> >
> > It would be interesting to know why you didn't reply to me on your Forum,
> > as a 'paid-up' member of SQL-Ledger since I started using it 3-4 years
> > ago, and tell me I screwed up, and to fix my own f'up.  Or else at least
> > make some attempt to see if it might be a bug?
>
>
> Why should I hunt for a bug, just because you don't get it?
>
> I replied to your request with a detailed explaination of what you have to
> do.

Not true.  We have had no communication re Reconciliation either privately, on 
the Forum, or on this list. 

In my Forum enquiry I cut & pasted your instructions to 'tdiehl' of 09/04/07 
to show you that 1) I had the same problem as 'tdiehl' and 2) I had made 
every effort to follow your instruction to fix this problem. 

Maybe you're confusing me with 'thdiehl'?

> What more do you need? 

At the very least perhaps you could post to the privacy of the Forum the quick 
private email explanation that seems to have satisfied je...@ix...? 
Like Jeff I am familiar with the concept of 'Reconciliation', having used 
Paxton's Business Desk in the 1980's (cobol!) and then Quicken and MYOB 
before SQL-Ledger, but there is obviously some extra 'concept' in SQL-Ledger 
which is escaping me.
 
Hamish



-- 
Sent via KMail 1.9.7, Gentoo 1.12.11.1, Linux-2.6.22-gentoo-r8

[SL] Re: SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items - Probable resolution

[<je...@ix...>]

What is the difference between the European and North American methodology?
Is there one?

I have been using SQL since the middle of 2003. My company started business
in late 2002, and I needed to do the reconciliations on the past statements
(as it had never been done), and I have done every reconciliation since,
and every one has precisely matched my bank statements. I have done
reconciliations at other companies, I have used Platnium, Quickbooks and
Great Plains, and to me the concept is all the same, everything that isn't
reconciled yet, shows up, once its reconciled its gone. My experience with
this goes as far back as 1998. I think my main error in SQL has been that I
was able to reconcile without putting in date ranges, and until we upgraded
to 2.8, it has never been an issue. 



After a quick email exchange with Dieter, I think, if I do my next
reconciliation and I put in the beginning and ending date ranges from the
bank statement, and I ignore the fact that some past reconciled items will
show up. I believe that on the reconciliation after one, all the past items
will be properly reconciled, will not longer show up, and I will not have
any issues going forward.


I however did a work around on this round of reconciliations, I put in a
start date equal to the current date, and that prevented Feb and Mar 2009
reconciled items from showing up. However, I will have to start doing
reconciliations properly or this issue will show up every time.



Jeff

Jeff Kaminsky
General Accounting Manager
IX Systems





On Fri, 15 May 2009 19:35:20 +0200, Paul Tammes <pt...@wa...> wrote:
> The whole concept of Bank Statements seems European to me, US citizens
use
> checks and reconciliation instead iirc.
> I think the concept that reconciliation should match the bank statements
> like Dieter mentioned is solid and was long overdue.
> 
> However, it might take some thinking and reconsidering to get the basic
> idea
> across to people who are not used to check statements and live with
> messages
> like ´the check is in the mail´. That way of accounting was part of the
> start of the worldwide mess we have right now to begin with. If the check
> is
> mentioned in the statement, it is in. And can be reconciled with the
> statement number and invoice number as unique identifier. If not, we
might
> have a bad debt (or mortgage) on our hands.
> 
> 
> 2009/5/15 Dieter Simader <dsi...@sq...>
> 
>> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Hamish Bain wrote:
>>
>> > On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
>> >> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these
> transactions
>> >> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user
>> error,
>> >> well, then fix up your own f'up.
>> >
>> > It would be interesting to know why you didn't reply to me on your
> Forum,
>> as
>> > a 'paid-up' member of SQL-Ledger since I started using it 3-4 years
> ago,
>> and
>> > tell me I screwed up, and to fix my own f'up.  Or else at least make
> some
>> > attempt to see if it might be a bug?
>>
>> Why should I hunt for a bug, just because you don't get it?
>>
>> I replied to your request with a detailed explaination of what you have
> to
>> do. What more do you need?
>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
>> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
>> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
>> for externally facing server and web deployment.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
>> _______________________________________________
>> sql-ledger-users mailing list
>> sql...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables 
> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine 
> for externally facing server and web deployment. 
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Paul T. <pt...@wa...>]

The whole concept of Bank Statements seems European to me, US citizens use
checks and reconciliation instead iirc.
I think the concept that reconciliation should match the bank statements
like Dieter mentioned is solid and was long overdue.

However, it might take some thinking and reconsidering to get the basic idea
across to people who are not used to check statements and live with messages
like ´the check is in the mail´. That way of accounting was part of the
start of the worldwide mess we have right now to begin with. If the check is
mentioned in the statement, it is in. And can be reconciled with the
statement number and invoice number as unique identifier. If not, we might
have a bad debt (or mortgage) on our hands.


2009/5/15 Dieter Simader <dsi...@sq...>

> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Hamish Bain wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
> >> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions
> >> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user
> error,
> >> well, then fix up your own f'up.
> >
> > It would be interesting to know why you didn't reply to me on your Forum,
> as
> > a 'paid-up' member of SQL-Ledger since I started using it 3-4 years ago,
> and
> > tell me I screwed up, and to fix my own f'up.  Or else at least make some
> > attempt to see if it might be a bug?
>
> Why should I hunt for a bug, just because you don't get it?
>
> I replied to your request with a detailed explaination of what you have to
> do. What more do you need?
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
> for externally facing server and web deployment.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>

Re: [SL] How to account for pre-payments

[Paul T. <pt...@wa...>]

I think you do it correctly.
However, there are *some *countries where tax-authorities have a very
narrow-minded view on 'work in progress' like this, combined with rules on
what part of work should be taken as profit when.

In case of doubt, check with them (tax authorities)  also.

2009/5/15 Jersey <je...@ib...>

> Hi there,
>
> I am not an accountant... but I have sometimes 50% of invoice value
> prepayments long before the final delivery is due. I treat them like a loan
> (At the end of the day actually it is :)). I created a "service" item with
> income pointing to liability account called "deposit received". I invoice
> the client with this item before finilising the contract. And on final
> invoice I credit that item. This way I do not have a false, artificial
> profit/loss in case I receive the order (and payment) one financial year
> and
> I deliver the goods next financial year.
> Reverse applies when I do prepayment.
>
> Am I correct? Any comments.
>
> Regards
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Phillips [mailto:mar...@mo...]
> Sent: 07 May 2009 01:59 AM
> To: sql...@li...
> Subject: Re: [SL] How to account for pre-payments
>
>
> On May 6, 2009, at 10:31 AM, Paul Tammes wrote:
> > Why prepay at all? Especially an accountant should see the logic
> > that one
> > has to send an invoice in order to get paid.
>
> I respectfully disagree. It is quite common for many businesses to
> require a retainer or "advance billing deposit". Some will not begin a
> project until funds sufficient to cover the anticipated work are
> deposited, even as much as 100% of the anticipated billing. Some of
> these will produce an invoice based on an estimate or contract, then
> amend if required.
>
> Others do not invoice until the end of a project. In the meantime, the
> estimate serves as the controlling document, with funds advanced and
> charges tracked against the estimate. At the time of invoice, the
> charges and payments are tallied and posted so they appear on the
> invoice and are "booked" in accordance with the accounting policies of
> the client.
>
> FWIW, I have no idea how this fits into SL, so my comments are more
> general in nature. That said, I have created such processes in the
> software applications we maintain and develop for clients. As another
> poster wrote, the point is to make sure the value of the service or
> product is compensated, or more plainly, to make sure you get paid.
>
>
> Mark Phillips
>
> -------------- next part --------------
>
>
> On the web at www.mophilly.com
> On the phone at (619) 444-9210
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK
> i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
> for externally facing server and web deployment.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>

Re: [SL] How to account for pre-payments

[Jersey <je...@ib...>]

Hi there,

I am not an accountant... but I have sometimes 50% of invoice value
prepayments long before the final delivery is due. I treat them like a loan
(At the end of the day actually it is :)). I created a "service" item with
income pointing to liability account called "deposit received". I invoice
the client with this item before finilising the contract. And on final
invoice I credit that item. This way I do not have a false, artificial
profit/loss in case I receive the order (and payment) one financial year and
I deliver the goods next financial year.
Reverse applies when I do prepayment.

Am I correct? Any comments.

Regards

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Phillips [mailto:mar...@mo...] 
Sent: 07 May 2009 01:59 AM
To: sql...@li...
Subject: Re: [SL] How to account for pre-payments


On May 6, 2009, at 10:31 AM, Paul Tammes wrote:
> Why prepay at all? Especially an accountant should see the logic  
> that one
> has to send an invoice in order to get paid.

I respectfully disagree. It is quite common for many businesses to  
require a retainer or "advance billing deposit". Some will not begin a  
project until funds sufficient to cover the anticipated work are  
deposited, even as much as 100% of the anticipated billing. Some of  
these will produce an invoice based on an estimate or contract, then  
amend if required.

Others do not invoice until the end of a project. In the meantime, the  
estimate serves as the controlling document, with funds advanced and  
charges tracked against the estimate. At the time of invoice, the  
charges and payments are tallied and posted so they appear on the  
invoice and are "booked" in accordance with the accounting policies of  
the client.

FWIW, I have no idea how this fits into SL, so my comments are more  
general in nature. That said, I have created such processes in the  
software applications we maintain and develop for clients. As another  
poster wrote, the point is to make sure the value of the service or  
product is compensated, or more plainly, to make sure you get paid.


Mark Phillips

-------------- next part --------------


On the web at www.mophilly.com
On the phone at (619) 444-9210




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to
Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK
i700
Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image 
processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
_______________________________________________
sql-ledger-users mailing list
sql...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Dieter S. <dsi...@sq...>]

On Fri, 15 May 2009, Hamish Bain wrote:

> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
>> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions
>> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user error,
>> well, then fix up your own f'up.
>
> It would be interesting to know why you didn't reply to me on your Forum, as
> a 'paid-up' member of SQL-Ledger since I started using it 3-4 years ago, and
> tell me I screwed up, and to fix my own f'up.  Or else at least make some
> attempt to see if it might be a bug?

Why should I hunt for a bug, just because you don't get it?

I replied to your request with a detailed explaination of what you have to 
do. What more do you need?

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Hamish B. <hw...@be...>]

On Fri, 15 May 2009, Dieter Simader wrote:
> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions
> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user error,
> well, then fix up your own f'up.

It would be interesting to know why you didn't reply to me on your Forum, as 
a 'paid-up' member of SQL-Ledger since I started using it 3-4 years ago, and 
tell me I screwed up, and to fix my own f'up.  Or else at least make some 
attempt to see if it might be a bug?
 

Hamish



-- 
Sent via KMail 1.9.7, Gentoo 1.12.11.1, Linux-2.6.22-gentoo-r8
www.bestbrook.com

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[John S. <jo...@sc...>]

Hi All,

The reconciliation machanism in SL is not unlike other accounting systems 
that I have worked on. My accounts department realised long ago (on another 
acounting system) to differentiate between different deposits on the same 
day using unique reference numbers.

I have found that using the "Detailed" option when reconciling helps as this 
lists the individual items where a deposit or payment consists of more than 
one item. The downside is when there are a large number of invoices as part 
of the receipt of payment.

Either way, my accounts depertment like the general functionality of SL and 
are appreciative to all who contribute to it.

Cheers,

John
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael Hasse" <mh...@it...>
To: <sql...@li...>
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 4:09 AM
Subject: Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items


> On May 14, 2009, at 5:58 PM, Dieter Simader wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:
>
>> As I wrote in another thread, there are at least three issues:
>>
>> 1. When there are multiple receipts for a single invoice/date or same
>> amount/date, only one is shown. This happens when
>>
>> * When source column is blank for both payments
>> * When source column contains same value for both payments.
> Use a distinct source number. It is common practise in Europe to have a
> distinct number for every payment. Get used to some consistancy, if not
> live with the consequences!
> ======================
> Sorry Dieter, that argument won't fly in the real world.  The
> application should also have some protection against user-error.
>
>> 2) Marking one receipt of *same* invoice as reconciled will
>> incorrectly mark the other receipt as reconciled as well.
> As it should because the source is the same.
> ======================
> Then why are the receipts listed separately?  This is an application
> error and/or inconsistency.
>
>> 3) Reconciled transactions are displayed on reconciliation screen
>> forever making it inconvenient and error prone to do the
>> reconciliation.
> Not so, use it properly.
> ======================
> Again, the application should have some protection against user-error.
>
>> If we can find a way to get rid of these issues without applying the
>> patch, please let us know.
> You are certainly entitled to your opinion!
> ======================
> And people are also entitled to use another application.
>    If you want to keep customers Dieter you have to listen to what
> they have to say.  I realize you have a personal beef with Ledger123
> and LedgerSMB and the other forks, but the fact is forks occur when
> the original developer(s) won't listen to the users.  Case in point!
>    I'm not saying I don't feel for you in this, I've worked on
> enough apps myself to understand the developer's side of the
> frustration equation all too well, but even if you're technically
> 100% right on all counts the reality of the situation is that the
> rest of the world perceives otherwise and it behooves you to
> understand why...
>
>
> On a lighter note - thanks to both Armaghan and Dieter for helping
> make the OSS world a better place for everyone!
>
> Michael
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
> Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
> unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
> for externally facing server and web deployment.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users 

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Michael H. <mh...@it...>]

On May 14, 2009, at 5:58 PM, Dieter Simader wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:

> As I wrote in another thread, there are at least three issues:
>
> 1. When there are multiple receipts for a single invoice/date or same
> amount/date, only one is shown. This happens when
>
> * When source column is blank for both payments
> * When source column contains same value for both payments.
Use a distinct source number. It is common practise in Europe to have a
distinct number for every payment. Get used to some consistancy, if not
live with the consequences!
======================
Sorry Dieter, that argument won't fly in the real world.  The  
application should also have some protection against user-error.

> 2) Marking one receipt of *same* invoice as reconciled will
> incorrectly mark the other receipt as reconciled as well.
As it should because the source is the same.
======================
Then why are the receipts listed separately?  This is an application  
error and/or inconsistency.

> 3) Reconciled transactions are displayed on reconciliation screen
> forever making it inconvenient and error prone to do the
> reconciliation.
Not so, use it properly.
======================
Again, the application should have some protection against user-error.

> If we can find a way to get rid of these issues without applying the
> patch, please let us know.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion!
======================
And people are also entitled to use another application.
    If you want to keep customers Dieter you have to listen to what  
they have to say.  I realize you have a personal beef with Ledger123  
and LedgerSMB and the other forks, but the fact is forks occur when  
the original developer(s) won't listen to the users.  Case in point!
    I'm not saying I don't feel for you in this, I've worked on  
enough apps myself to understand the developer's side of the  
frustration equation all too well, but even if you're technically  
100% right on all counts the reality of the situation is that the  
rest of the world perceives otherwise and it behooves you to  
understand why...


On a lighter note - thanks to both Armaghan and Dieter for helping  
make the OSS world a better place for everyone!

Michael

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Dieter S. <dsi...@sq...>]

On Fri, 15 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:

> As I wrote in another thread, there are at least three issues:
>
> 1. When there are multiple receipts for a single invoice/date or same
> amount/date, only one is shown. This happens when
>
> * When source column is blank for both payments
> * When source column contains same value for both payments.

Use a distinct source number. It is common practise in Europe to have a 
distinct number for every payment. Get used to some consistancy, if not 
live with the consequences!

>
> 2) Marking one receipt of *same* invoice as reconciled will
> incorrectly mark the other receipt as reconciled as well.

As it should because the source is the same.

>
> 3) Reconciled transactions are displayed on reconciliation screen
> forever making it inconvenient and error prone to do the
> reconciliation.

Not so, use it properly.

>
> If we can find a way to get rid of these issues without applying the
> patch, please let us know.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion!

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Michael H. <mh...@it...>]

Thanks for the repost Armaghan, I missed the other thread.
    And I take it these issues still exist even with the latest code  
from Dieter?



Michael


On May 14, 2009, at 4:48 PM, Armaghan Saqib wrote:

As I wrote in another thread, there are at least three issues:

1. When there are multiple receipts for a single invoice/date or same
amount/date, only one is shown. This happens when

* When source column is blank for both payments
* When source column contains same value for both payments.

2) Marking one receipt of *same* invoice as reconciled will
incorrectly mark the other receipt as reconciled as well.

3) Reconciled transactions are displayed on reconciliation screen
forever making it inconvenient and error prone to do the
reconciliation.

If we can find a way to get rid of these issues without applying the
patch, please let us know.

Regards

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial
Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables
unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine
for externally facing server and web deployment.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects
_______________________________________________
sql-ledger-users mailing list
sql...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Armaghan S. <sa...@le...>]

As I wrote in another thread, there are at least three issues:

1. When there are multiple receipts for a single invoice/date or same
amount/date, only one is shown. This happens when

* When source column is blank for both payments
* When source column contains same value for both payments.

2) Marking one receipt of *same* invoice as reconciled will
incorrectly mark the other receipt as reconciled as well.

3) Reconciled transactions are displayed on reconciliation screen
forever making it inconvenient and error prone to do the
reconciliation.

If we can find a way to get rid of these issues without applying the
patch, please let us know.

Regards

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Michael H. <mh...@it...>]

This is interesting, as the questions seem to be revolving around old  
versions working and new versions not working!
    We haven't ever seen any problems either way, but we do things  
pretty simply around here.
    My suspicion would be that there is either a problem in the  
upgrade process or the way the data is being interpreted within the  
app and/or by the end user.  (Perception is everything!  :)
    So we still come back to the original question of whether the  
patch is valid...?
    Anybody out there take a good look at what the patched code does  
vs the current (and/or old) original code?


Thanks,

Michael


On May 14, 2009, at 1:20 PM, Dieter Simader wrote:

Take a statement from a bank and compare it to the reconcilation screen.
It will match your statement. The reconciliation process in previous
versions did not match because it was an ongoing process. With the new
version you can go back and also reconcile past statements.


On Thu, 14 May 2009, Michael Hasse wrote:

> I beg to differ Dieter.  It may work as the programmer who wrote it
> intended, but if there is sufficient confusion as to the manner/means/
> mode of that "working" to prompt other people to rewrite it and for
> the end users to believe those re-writes have "fixed" it, then the
> average person would have to conclude that the original code is
> broken, at least insofar as it does not function in the real world as
> the user expects it to.  And when you come right down to it, spec or
> no spec, it's really the users who ultimately have final say as to
> whether something works.
>    Believe me, I'm not casting aspersions against your code.  I know
> you're very talented and if you say it works then I'm sure it does!
> But it would be of benefit to all if some understanding were reached
> as to why everyone else believes it doesn't.  I would hazard to guess
> that examining exactly what that patch does would be a good first  
> step.
>    The second step would be to either incorporate the patch if it's
> not actually harmful, or to broadcast to the world exactly why the
> patch is, in fact, a Thing of Evil which will wreak havoc upon the
> applier's SL universe.
>    Unfortunately the current situation creates doubt in everyone's
> mind about both products and that doesn't help anybody.  :(
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
>
> On May 14, 2009, at 9:22 AM, Dieter Simader wrote:
>
> The reconciliation process works as intended. If there are prior
> reconciled transactions showing up then the reconciliation process
> was not
> done correctly.
>
> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these  
> transactions
> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user
> error,
> well, then fix up your own f'up.
>
>
> On Thu, 14 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:
>
>> This patch is now available on ledger123.com's git repository at
>> http://github.com/ledger123. Kindly test it and let me know any
>> issues. I shall be happy to immediately correct any other issue. The
>> repository version has been synced with sql-ledger-2.8.24.
>>
>> If you are not comfortable with git, email me offline and I shall  
>> send
>> you the patched files.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --
> ------
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances!  
> Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but
> thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW
> KODAK i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> --------
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances!  
> Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but  
> thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW  
> KODAK i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but  
thanks to
Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW  
KODAK i700
Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
_______________________________________________
sql-ledger-users mailing list
sql...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Dieter S. <dsi...@sq...>]

Take a statement from a bank and compare it to the reconcilation screen. 
It will match your statement. The reconciliation process in previous 
versions did not match because it was an ongoing process. With the new 
version you can go back and also reconcile past statements.


On Thu, 14 May 2009, Michael Hasse wrote:

> I beg to differ Dieter.  It may work as the programmer who wrote it
> intended, but if there is sufficient confusion as to the manner/means/
> mode of that "working" to prompt other people to rewrite it and for
> the end users to believe those re-writes have "fixed" it, then the
> average person would have to conclude that the original code is
> broken, at least insofar as it does not function in the real world as
> the user expects it to.  And when you come right down to it, spec or
> no spec, it's really the users who ultimately have final say as to
> whether something works.
>    Believe me, I'm not casting aspersions against your code.  I know
> you're very talented and if you say it works then I'm sure it does!
> But it would be of benefit to all if some understanding were reached
> as to why everyone else believes it doesn't.  I would hazard to guess
> that examining exactly what that patch does would be a good first step.
>    The second step would be to either incorporate the patch if it's
> not actually harmful, or to broadcast to the world exactly why the
> patch is, in fact, a Thing of Evil which will wreak havoc upon the
> applier's SL universe.
>    Unfortunately the current situation creates doubt in everyone's
> mind about both products and that doesn't help anybody.  :(
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michael
>
>
> On May 14, 2009, at 9:22 AM, Dieter Simader wrote:
>
> The reconciliation process works as intended. If there are prior
> reconciled transactions showing up then the reconciliation process
> was not
> done correctly.
>
> Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions
> show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user
> error,
> well, then fix up your own f'up.
>
>
> On Thu, 14 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:
>
>> This patch is now available on ledger123.com's git repository at
>> http://github.com/ledger123. Kindly test it and let me know any
>> issues. I shall be happy to immediately correct any other issue. The
>> repository version has been synced with sql-ledger-2.8.24.
>>
>> If you are not comfortable with git, email me offline and I shall send
>> you the patched files.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but
> thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW
> KODAK i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
> production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to
> Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700
> Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
> processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
> _______________________________________________
> sql-ledger-users mailing list
> sql...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users
>

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Michael H. <mh...@it...>]

I beg to differ Dieter.  It may work as the programmer who wrote it  
intended, but if there is sufficient confusion as to the manner/means/ 
mode of that "working" to prompt other people to rewrite it and for  
the end users to believe those re-writes have "fixed" it, then the  
average person would have to conclude that the original code is  
broken, at least insofar as it does not function in the real world as  
the user expects it to.  And when you come right down to it, spec or  
no spec, it's really the users who ultimately have final say as to  
whether something works.
    Believe me, I'm not casting aspersions against your code.  I know  
you're very talented and if you say it works then I'm sure it does!   
But it would be of benefit to all if some understanding were reached  
as to why everyone else believes it doesn't.  I would hazard to guess  
that examining exactly what that patch does would be a good first step.
    The second step would be to either incorporate the patch if it's  
not actually harmful, or to broadcast to the world exactly why the  
patch is, in fact, a Thing of Evil which will wreak havoc upon the  
applier's SL universe.
    Unfortunately the current situation creates doubt in everyone's  
mind about both products and that doesn't help anybody.  :(


Thanks!

Michael


On May 14, 2009, at 9:22 AM, Dieter Simader wrote:

The reconciliation process works as intended. If there are prior
reconciled transactions showing up then the reconciliation process  
was not
done correctly.

Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions
show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user  
error,
well, then fix up your own f'up.


On Thu, 14 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:

> This patch is now available on ledger123.com's git repository at
> http://github.com/ledger123. Kindly test it and let me know any
> issues. I shall be happy to immediately correct any other issue. The
> repository version has been synced with sql-ledger-2.8.24.
>
> If you are not comfortable with git, email me offline and I shall send
> you the patched files.
>
> Regards
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your
production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but  
thanks to
Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW  
KODAK i700
Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image
processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com
_______________________________________________
sql-ledger-users mailing list
sql...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sql-ledger-users

Re: [SL] SL: Cash Reconcilation showing past reconciled items

[Dieter S. <dsi...@sq...>]

The reconciliation process works as intended. If there are prior 
reconciled transactions showing up then the reconciliation process was not 
done correctly.

Before applying a patch users should investigate why these transactions 
show up. If it is a bug it will be fixed but if it is simply a user error, 
well, then fix up your own f'up.


On Thu, 14 May 2009, Armaghan Saqib wrote:

> This patch is now available on ledger123.com's git repository at
> http://github.com/ledger123. Kindly test it and let me know any
> issues. I shall be happy to immediately correct any other issue. The
> repository version has been synced with sql-ledger-2.8.24.
>
> If you are not comfortable with git, email me offline and I shall send
> you the patched files.
>
> Regards
>