|
Posted by Jim Jensen on September 5, 2007, 5:22 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Bernie Cosell wrote:
> This is a dumb little problem: I have a bunch of transactions in a
> category C and I need to subdivide them [so I can do some better
> reporting] into C:A and C:B. Step 1 was easy enough: I did a "find
> all" for category C, went through and selected all the A-trans and
> re-categoried them and then did the same with the B-trans. I think
> that it was all OK, but I might have missed a few (there were >300
> transactions in C) so I wanted to do a check on the transactions
> *left* in category C and not-yet moved either to C:A or C:B. I can't
> find a way to do that. If I search for C it gets C, C:A _and C:B.
>
> The only way I've come up with to do it is to make two new/fake
> categories, BB and AA, and move all the C:A trans to AA, C:B to BB
> and *NOW* searching for C should show only the ones I missed. Then
> when everything's set, I just transfer BB->C:B, AA->C:A and delete AA
> and BB. A little klunky but it'll do the job -- but I was wondering:
> is there a more elegant way to do this kind of thing? Thanks!!
>
> /Bernie
Create a transaction report and customize it to show transactions for
category C
Customize further under Matching Categories, and insert ~:
This will search for all instances of C without a : (subcategory)
|