https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=321108
--- Comment #7 from allan <agande...@gmail.com> --- (In reply to comment #6) > > I prefer to think of it as a feature, rather than a bug! The change was > > made deliberately, rather than by accident. It came about following > > discovery of several inconsistencies where the Enter/OK was not enabled when > > it should have been, or vice versa. See Bug 314955. > > > > I did flag the issue there, and canvassed - > > " > > It would be good to know what fields should be regarded as mandatory for > > transaction entry. I don't know if some looseness is allowed, because of > > importing, but then it is quite strictly laid out for investments. > > > > Allan, apologies if I missed some earlier discussions about this. I can see > you did ask for opinions. However, in my defense, Bug 314955 makes no > mention of making payee mandatory. In fact, under expected results it says > "The two entry methods should behave similarly, so far as the amount field > is concerned." suggesting an inconsistency with the amount field. That's OK, Dave. I just wanted to point out that I hadn't just suddenly decided to make the change on a personal whim. There was at least one other bug, 311481, that contributed to the realisation that things were not ideal. I'll revisit this shortly. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ KMyMoney-devel mailing list KMyMoney-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmymoney-devel
