FrontAccounting forum — Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (itronics) — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 16:43:16 +0000

This is legacy of architectural flaw in FA predecessor db scheme. Original author have used trans_no/id for two purposes:
. as internal transaction id, which is unique for every completed document revision;
. as document reference for legal purposes, which have to maintain continuity in most countries, and is the same after document edition.

Those two purposes for trans_no are in permanent conflict, which emerges e.g. when you void a document. Or, in other words, this is the same problem british government tries to resolve unsuccessfully since two years at least: you can't have your cake and eat it too.

To avoid this (and make document numbering scheme more flexible), we have added reference field to all documents, which is preserved after document edition. You should always use this field as unique identifier, and leave trans_no/id for internal use.

Janusz

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (kvvaradha) — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 08:05:45 +0000

You are right .

@joe, can you tell us the reason, why we keep on going to new numbers, and also i think we can keep the updation, when it doesnot affect the amount and date.

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (chan2703) — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 05:44:45 +0000

Definitely there must be some reason for bumping up the original invoice/journal entry number. I guess some transactions may need to void the original and then recreate a new one. But for simply modifying a memo field without changing other details, shouldn't the original invoice/journal entry be kept?

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (kvvaradha) — Fri, 12 Oct 2018 01:43:07 +0000

I had a similar question. But Joe said, there is an reason to program like this and he forget the reason to state it.

We need to edit few files to make it work. I have done a similar thing to a FA user before.

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (chan2703) — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:22:36 +0000

How then can I modify a journal entry or an invoice? When I modify a journal entry, for instance the memo description, I have to click the 'Process Journal Entry' button. It will then replace the original journal entry # with a new one. But I want to keep the original journal entry number.

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (kvvaradha) — Thu, 11 Oct 2018 05:09:05 +0000

Ofcourse you are right, For journal entries, the program voids the existing journal recreate with your new changes.

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (chan2703) — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 16:42:22 +0000

Yes, it would. Not only invoices, but also journal entries. I just tested it again.
First, enter some journal entries. Say you have entered 2. Then do journal enquiry for the entries just entered. Modify any one of the entries but clicking the pencil icon. When you've done some modification, click 'Process journal entry' to effect the modification. Do journal enquiry again. You'll find the original journal # would be incremented.

It is the same for invoices.

My FA is 2.4.4

Re: Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (kvvaradha) — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 15:57:50 +0000

no, it wont be affected. those numbers remain same. the reference and transaction number both kept after edit

Invoice modification would replace the original invoice #

null@example.com (chan2703) — Wed, 10 Oct 2018 10:27:52 +0000

I just modified the invoice memo field and saved (Enter Invoice) . The original invoice # would be replaced with a new number.