I'm strugling a bit with the content of the payee field of a transaction.
I realize that ledger doesn't really impose anything in this respect, which is nice because one can do whatever one wants (assuming that one knows what he wants :-s ) but not so nice if one isn't sure about how to proceed due to lack of knowledge or experience.
So... as a newbie, in an attempt to not reinvent the wheel, I'm interested in the knowledge and experience of others and I would like to ask: "How do you use the payee field?"
Do you use it to specify a payee, i.e. the person/institution that money is going to is case of an expense of the coming from in case of an income. In this case the possible payee field values would be a *limited* list of people or instances you have dealings with. Each person/instance would only be referred to using one specific *known* payee string. Which you could potentially use in analysis later on.
Or
Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the transaction is about? E.g provide context of the transaction which is inherently *unknown* before hand. In this case the payee field value would be non-descript. Because the field value can be anything it can't be used to filter or analysis, it would only be used as an aid to remember what the transaction was about.
I use the payee field to specify the payee (or "ATM", "Transfer") and use
the note field (simple indented comment) to store notes. This way the
output of "ledger payees" remains useful.
On Oct 21, 2012 6:46 PM, "Jeroen De Vlieger" <fly....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm strugling a bit with the content of the payee field of a transaction.
> I realize that ledger doesn't really impose anything in this respect,
> which is nice because one can do whatever one wants (assuming that one
> knows what he wants :-s )
> but not so nice if one isn't sure about how to proceed due to lack of
> knowledge or experience.
> So...
> as a newbie, in an attempt to not reinvent the wheel,
> I'm interested in the knowledge and experience of others and I would like
> to ask:
> "How do you use the payee field?"
> Do you use it to specify a payee, i.e. the person/institution that money
> is going to is case of an expense of the coming from in case of an income.
> In this case the possible payee field values would be a *limited* list of
> people or instances you have dealings with.
> Each person/instance would only be referred to using one specific *known*
> payee string. Which you could potentially use in analysis later on.
> Or
> Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the
> transaction is about? E.g provide context of the transaction which is
> inherently *unknown* before hand.
> In this case the payee field value would be non-descript. Because the
> field value can be anything it can't be used to filter or analysis, it
> would only be used as an aid to remember what the transaction was about.
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Johann Klähn <kljoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I use the payee field to specify the payee (or "ATM", "Transfer") and use
> the note field (simple indented comment) to store notes. This way the
> output of "ledger payees" remains useful.
thx for the input Johann :-)
Seeing that it list all payees I assume you are a defender of casus 1.
I haven't yet used the payees command myself, but I do use the register
command very often and
till now, do remember that I have just recently started using ledger, I
used the payees field as a free form description (casus 2) because
this description would then show up in the register command output giving
some context to all the transactions.
In your case the register command would simply list the payee's for each
transaction which would be generally unhelpful in giving some the context
of each transaction or am I now missing something? Or misusing the tool in
some way?
> On Oct 21, 2012 6:46 PM, "Jeroen De Vlieger" <fly....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I'm strugling a bit with the content of the payee field of a transaction.
>> I realize that ledger doesn't really impose anything in this respect,
>> which is nice because one can do whatever one wants (assuming that one
>> knows what he wants :-s )
>> but not so nice if one isn't sure about how to proceed due to lack of
>> knowledge or experience.
>> So...
>> as a newbie, in an attempt to not reinvent the wheel,
>> I'm interested in the knowledge and experience of others and I would like
>> to ask:
>> "How do you use the payee field?"
>> Do you use it to specify a payee, i.e. the person/institution that money
>> is going to is case of an expense of the coming from in case of an income.
>> In this case the possible payee field values would be a *limited* list of
>> people or instances you have dealings with.
>> Each person/instance would only be referred to using one specific *known*
>> payee string. Which you could potentially use in analysis later on.
>> Or
>> Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the
>> transaction is about? E.g provide context of the transaction which is
>> inherently *unknown* before hand.
>> In this case the payee field value would be non-descript. Because the
>> field value can be anything it can't be used to filter or analysis, it
>> would only be used as an aid to remember what the transaction was about.
Using "ledger --payee note reg", ledger will use the note field instead of
the payee, if available. So it is possible to get both types of output
using case 1. But feel free to structure your ledger file as you see fit!
After all that's the joy of using ledger.
On Oct 21, 2012 8:25 PM, "Martin Michlmayr" <t...@cyrius.com> wrote:
> * Jeroen De Vlieger <fly....@gmail.com> [2012-10-21 09:46]:
> > Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the
> > transaction is about?
> That's what I do since I want to see a description of the transaction
> with "ledger reg".
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Johann Klähn <kljoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Using "ledger --payee note reg", ledger will use the note field instead of
> the payee, if available. So it is possible to get both types of output
> using case 1.
Thx I didn't yet know about the --payee note option.
I'm reading the manual and as I go and try to get some experience by using
the stuff I learn.
I haven't yet completed the reading of the manual though, guess I should
put in a bit more effort on that front.
On Oct 21, 2012 8:25 PM, "Martin Michlmayr" <t...@cyrius.com> wrote:
>> * Jeroen De Vlieger <fly....@gmail.com> [2012-10-21 09:46]:
>> > Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the
>> > transaction is about?
>> That's what I do since I want to see a description of the transaction
>> with "ledger reg".
On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Jeroen De Vlieger <fly....@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Johann Klähn <kljoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Using "ledger --payee note reg", ledger will use the note field instead
>> of the payee, if available. So it is possible to get both types of output
>> using case 1.
> Thx I didn't yet know about the --payee note option.
> I'm reading the manual and as I go and try to get some experience by using
> the stuff I learn.
> I haven't yet completed the reading of the manual though, guess I should
> put in a bit more effort on that front.
Is is possible that this actually isn't documented yet? I have been
fruitlessly hunting this information down in the ledger 3.0 documentation
:-s
If so how did you learn of this option?
> On Oct 21, 2012 8:25 PM, "Martin Michlmayr" <t...@cyrius.com> wrote:
>>> * Jeroen De Vlieger <fly....@gmail.com> [2012-10-21 09:46]:
>>> > Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the
>>> > transaction is about?
>>> That's what I do since I want to see a description of the transaction
>>> with "ledger reg".
> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Jeroen De Vlieger <fly....@gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 9:00 PM, Johann Klähn <kljoh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Using "ledger --payee note reg", ledger will use the note field instead
>>> of the payee, if available. So it is possible to get both types of output
>>> using case 1.
>> Thx I didn't yet know about the --payee note option.
>> I'm reading the manual and as I go and try to get some experience by
>> using the stuff I learn.
>> I haven't yet completed the reading of the manual though, guess I should
>> put in a bit more effort on that front.
> Is is possible that this actually isn't documented yet? I have been
> fruitlessly hunting this information down in the ledger 3.0 documentation
> :-s
> If so how did you learn of this option?
> Jeroen
>> On Oct 21, 2012 8:25 PM, "Martin Michlmayr" <t...@cyrius.com> wrote:
>>>> * Jeroen De Vlieger <fly....@gmail.com> [2012-10-21 09:46]:
>>>> > Do you use it to give a general free form description of what the
>>>> > transaction is about?
>>>> That's what I do since I want to see a description of the transaction
>>>> with "ledger reg".
I found out about it by browsing the source, but it's also documented
at http://www.ledger-cli.org/3.0/doc/ledger3.html#Report-Options :
--payee <VEXPR>
Sets a value expression for formatting the payee. In the register
report this prevents the second entry from having a date and payee for
each transaction
Hi Jeroen,
I use the payee field to denote the person/institution where
the money flows to and use a Payee tag to set a different payee
for the individual postings.
One example: Assume I've made some digital prints and
bought some binders and pens along with that at my
favorite copy shop ACME Inc.
Now the money flows to AMCE Inc. (payee) and
comes from my checking account (1st posting)
though for me it is a office supply expense (2nd posting)
% cat <<EOF | ledger -f - reg --wide
2012/10/30 * (1) ACME Inc.
Assets:Bank:Checking € 50,00
Expenses:Office Supplies
; Payee: Binders, Pens, Digital Prints
EOF
30.10.2012 ACME Inc. Assets:Bank:Checking € 50,00 € 50,00
Binders, Pens, Digital Prints Expenses:Office Supplies € -50,00 0
The example demonstrates, that the payee field is set for each
posting individually, the best of both worlds ;)
> I use the payee field to denote the person/institution where
> the money flows to and use a Payee tag to set a different payee
> for the individual postings.
> One example: Assume I've made some digital prints and
> bought some binders and pens along with that at my
> favorite copy shop ACME Inc.
> Now the money flows to AMCE Inc. (payee) and
> comes from my checking account (1st posting)
> though for me it is a office supply expense (2nd posting)
> % cat <<EOF | ledger -f - reg --wide
> 2012/10/30 * (1) ACME Inc.
> Assets:Bank:Checking € 50,00
> Expenses:Office Supplies
> ; Payee: Binders, Pens, Digital Prints
> EOF
> 30.10.2012 ACME Inc. Assets:Bank:Checking €
> 50,00 € 50,00
> Binders, Pens, Digital Prints Expenses:Office Supplies €
> -50,00 0
> The example demonstrates, that the payee field is set for each
> posting individually, the best of both worlds ;)
This is a great example and I just used it. However, it also allowed me to
exhibit a bug (recent Git version). If you add "--sort=amount", then both
sides of the account will show as if they were related to the "Binders,
Pens, Digital Prints" payee:
% cat <<EOF | ledger -f - reg --wide --sort=amount
2012/10/30 * (1) ACME Inc.
Assets:Bank:Checking € 50,00
Expenses:Office Supplies
; Payee: Binders, Pens, Digital Prints
EOF
12-Oct-30 Binders, Pens, Digital Prints Expenses:Office
Supplies € -50,00 € -50,00
Assets:Bank:Checking €
50,00 0
John, do I need to copy this into a bug report or do you have anything you
need here?
>>>>> Samuel Tardieu <s...@rfc1149.net> writes:
> This is a great example and I just used it. However, it also allowed me to
> exhibit a bug (recent Git version). If you add "--sort=amount", then both
> sides of the account will show as if they were related to the "Binders,
> Pens, Digital Prints" payee:
> % cat <<EOF | ledger -f - reg --wide --sort=amount
> 2012/10/30 * (1) ACME Inc.
> Assets:Bank:Checking € 50,00
> Expenses:Office Supplies
> ; Payee: Binders, Pens, Digital Prints
> EOF
> 12-Oct-30 Binders, Pens, Digital Prints Expenses:Office
> Supplies € -50,00 € -50,00
>
> Assets:Bank:Checking € 50,00
> 0
> John, do I need to copy this into a bug report or do you have anything you
> need here?
Too much information is always better than too little. Please copy everything
in the bug that might relate.
