GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 473348
SKR04 needs separate versions for every year
Last modified: 2018-06-29 21:47:53 UTC
our overly competent government makes changes every year and thus the chart of accounts for SKR04 will slightly changes every year. Maybe it is possible to split SKR04 into modules as proposed in another bug report and make the year-specific changes one module.
It's unclear to me exactly what the year-to-year changes look like, but the code processing those XML files doesn't have any notion of "merging" or "overlaying" one file's contents on top of another, which would seem to make isolating the year-to-year changes into a "module" difficult. It's probably better to just copy -and-tweak the previous year's templates/modules/files.
(In reply to comment #1) > It's unclear to me exactly what the year-to-year changes look like, but the > code processing those XML files doesn't have any notion of "merging" or > "overlaying" one file's contents on top of another, which would seem to make > isolating the year-to-year changes into a "module" difficult. It's probably > better to just copy -and-tweak the previous year's templates/modules/files. Josh, thank you for your comment. It helps me understand the inner workings of gnucash a bit better. There is still a lot I need to get my head wrapped around, though. It is possible to add several chart of accounts to a single gnucash file. Thus, I was wondering if it might be a solution to have skr04-base and skr04-2005, skr04-2006 and skr04-2007, for example, to provide the modularization. I will need to study the changes and the way those accountants usually deal with them more closely myself before I can make a judgment on this question.
#1: I think the german private account templates have a modular design? If the user keeps the data from more than one year in a file, and also in the template, one possibility would be, to introduce slots <valid from> <valid until>. But this would introduce the question, could there be: 2006: Erlöse 16% 4400 2007: Erlöse 16% 4340 2007: Erlöse 19% 4400 (example from DATEV: SKR04-2007) In other words: must account names or account numbers unique?
For the German context, account names and account numbers should probably be unique. I am not yet sure how gnucash should deal with updates to SKR accounts and having the same gnucash file span more than one year.
My current take on this subject is described in bug 473350 comment 2
It seems as if accounts get added but apparently there is no need to delete older accounts
As you can see in the spreadsheets at https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/kontenrahmen-devel/ there is much confusion under the german opensource maintainers of the systems of accounts, when DATEV dropped which account. It seems to me, that nearly every year they declare a few for invalid. 2008 they dropped the accounts, which were necessary, to have the old and the new VAT taxrate in the system.
I believe bug 538913 has the problem formulated more to the point. A user should keep all transactions for all years in a single file. Updates should be made to that file instead of creating a new file for every year. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 538913 ***
GnuCash bug tracking has moved to a new Bugzilla host. This bug has been copied to https://bugs.gnucash.org/show_bug.cgi?id=473348. Please update any external references or bookmarks.