Archiving with split transactions
I have been trying to use the archive function to clean some old data out of my 3 year Moneydance file. Since I was cleaning data out, I chose not to keep transactions in the original file and chose to archive cleared and uncleared transactions.
While the balances appeared to be correct after the archive operation, I noticed that all of my salary transactions during the archived period were left in my main moneydance file. After some investigation I realized this was probably due to the fact that my salary transactions are split transactions and a portion of the split goes to my 401k account. If I am wrong about this, the rest of the message below is probably irrelevant and maybe someone can explain what I did wrong.
I definitely understand the rationale for not archiving
investment accounts, but I have two concerns with what I saw
occur:
(1) The user's manual section describing archive operations made no
mention of the investment transaction limitations (when not
selecting to keep old transactions). I found this reference in a
post on this forum. (2) More troublesome is the fact that the
investment transactions were not included in the archive. I
understand how it might make sense not to leave them in both places
if I choose not to keep old transactions, but it also defeats the
purpose of creating a usable archive file since all my investment
transactions are missing from that file.
I recommend in order to improve clarity and prevent unintentional user errors that investment transactions like all other transactions always be archived even if they cannot be removed from the original MD file. Additionally, I recommend adding a fairly visible warning dialog to the archive process that explains to users who have investment accounts what will happen to their investment transactions depending upon what options they select for archiving.
nb
Support Staff 2 Posted by Tom Freeman on 01 Feb, 2011 04:57 PM
The reason the investment transactions weren't archived is that they are still open. Moneydance needs these transactions for determining cost basis, capital gains and such. In many instances these transactions may need to be referenced and when a transaction is archived Moneydance has no way to bring it back.
Tom
3 Posted by public.banek+nathan on 01 Feb, 2011 06:35 PM
I tried to be clear that I definitely understand the rationale behind why you would not want to pull these transactions out of the Moneydance file (and your reply confirms what I expected the rationale to be). My two concerns still stand regardless of this rationale.
Maybe the problem is one of terminology - particularly the terminology of archiving. From a user's perspective I expect two things when I archive: 1) My moneydance file is reduced in size and the active transactions in that file no longer include older transactions that have been archived because I no longer need to reference them. 2) The archive file is a usable moneydance file in its own right if I do need to go back to look at old transactions and reports.
As you (and I) have pointed out, #1 is not able to be fully realized with investment transactions because old investment transactions affect current data and reports. The problem is that this fact is not stated in the user's manual for Moneydance and so as a user I don't have a reason to expect this exception when I look at my current file and see old data. My suggestion to provide an alert to the user seems warranted since they may choose not to archive when made aware of this exceptional case.
The current archive implementation in Moneyance breaks #2 and results in an invalid archive file that does not produce the same reports as when that archived data was in my current file. I have provided a suggested solution to this, but should have used differently terminology so that I wouldn't confuse the issue from the implementers side. Let me rephrase my suggestion: I recommend in order to improve clarity and prevent unintentional user errors that investment transactions be COPIED to the archive file along with all the transactions that are archive. Since they are copied it is expected that they would also remain in the active MD file (and would need to do so to fulfill their function in affecting current investment reports).
I hope this helps clarify the concern and rationale for a fix.
4 Posted by public.banek+nathan on 07 Jan, 2012 04:30 PM
I realize the priority may not be high in this for MD, but I hope you all can review my last reply an indicate whether you have any intentions to address the issues identified. As it is the archive feature does not accomplish what a user would expect it to accomplish. I think my recommendation addresses the concern Tom raised while also improving the user experience.
Thanks
Support Staff 5 Posted by Tom Freeman on 09 Jan, 2012 08:32 PM
Nathan
I have attached a suggestion ticket to this thread for the suggestion to copy investment transactions to the archive file.
Tom
6 Posted by public.banek+nathan on 11 Jan, 2012 04:44 AM
Sounds great. Thanks.