Search options (Page 64 of 245)

Yes. Looks like it got orphaned:
https://frontaccounting.com/fawiki/index.php?n=Main.OpeningBalances
https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=30427#p30427
https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=31547#p31547
https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=1587
https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?id=7387
https://frontaccounting.com/punbb/viewtopic.php?pid=31548#p31548

If all receivables and payables are moved into the new FA using Journal entries, then allocation towards invoices cannot be done. Where such allocations are desired, the invoices that remain unpaid need to be manually entered in the previous fiscal year and the remaining should be entered using the Journal entry method.

What about the paginated entries that overflow to next page?

Banking and General Ledger => Maintenance => Bank Accounts +> Select Bank Account and make it Default (Dflt).

@joe: a nice functionality but may affect a lot more tables fields / scripts.

That will just prevent editing an existing Purchase Order's price.
Probably clone the said role as a new role, switching of the edit permission and create one for switching off the add/view purchase price permission as well which needs to be instantiated in the role instanciation script as well. Then use that role in your new purchase order form to replace the existing one possibly as an extension.

Your genealogy site is proprietary that may result in externally processed PHP code obfuscated/encoded code being used.
Your server's PHP can be tested by running a php file having <?php echo "Hello World!";  ?>.

PM the access details to have a look removing and confidential info / resetting passwords to be other than your normally used ones you can revert to later.

Since your FA webroot does not have config.php and config_db.php files, FA has not been installed. It could be a matter of file permissions of the webserver user for the folder in question.

@joe: How did this miss us? Probably no one generally deletes fiscal years that often....

There is no $total available anywhere in the said function's scope. Is it any global one?

The commit that introduced this line of code is here.
What is the need to add this journal entry here? There is no such addition in FA 2.3.26 and the rest of the code in this block was introduced in July 2011 in FA v2.3.6.

@joe: is it worth adding in this core feature?

The list of changed files is available in an Announcements post from previous version to current one and from current one to bleeding edge master set. Just use those files to overwrite the counterparts in the working fileset one after the other. Take a look at the differences in the en_US-new.sql file between the existing and new versions using a diff tool like WinMerge. Generally there may be minor schema differences (not in your instance) and some extra records / change in defaults especially in the sys_prefs table. Synch with your working tables and chosen Chart of accounts accordingly.

The method you listed will need to migrate your files from the company/# folders as well besides affecting the dependencies - files, tables and security choices - of various addons like languages, themes, extensions, etc.

Not displaying the reference number in such forms and then automatically generating it and populating the appropriate tables with it was discussed but that detracted from the freedom to make any non standard transaction reference by the end user and hence given up.

This happens when two or more transactions of the same type are being created and submitted (by different users or the same user from different browser tabs/windows) either simultaneously or one after the other after all had opened the entry form for creation.

When each instance opens an entry form for record creation, the current accepted dispensation makes the next available reference number as the default value in the form. This will be the same in all such form instances across users / browser instances as long as the last record for the transaction type reference has not changed. When the first one submits the record it is taken without any error. When the second one is submitted, it is  bearing the old "next reference" still and hence is rejected as it had been allotted to the one which was submitted first. Whilst it is possible to allot the real next reference that obtains at the time of submission, it was thought to be best presented to teh end user for choice of reference number instead - it may be implemented in private FA dispensations by allotted the next reference directly though and the code for it has been placed in the forum and possibly in the wiki adn the end user can make a choice.

The best way forward to have made a sys_prefs flag for prompting the enduser for choice of new reference or automatically take on the next available one. Although this affects a plethora of forms, it can be implemented directly in the add method of the relevant class definition.

@joe: If taken into the core with the appropriate default, it will save a few heart stops.