github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-03-10 20:23:07 -05:00
Code Issues 250 Packages Projects Releases 53 Wiki Activity

[Feature]: Hide invalid source categories from the cover overspending autocomplete list #1919

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-28 19:58:29 -06:00 by GiteaMirror · 6 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:29 -06:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @MrSkwiggs on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025).

Verified issue does not already exist?

  • I have searched and found no existing issue

What happened?

The option to cover overspending from the "To be budgeted" category does not work if the budget is already negative.

https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/92c5d5c1-6f46-4a26-bd44-605e5d7ba4b8

How can we reproduce the issue?

  1. Create a category (CategoryA)
  2. Budget enough in CategoryA to turn the monthly budget negative (if 1000 income, budget 1500 in CategoryA)
  3. Add some expenses above the budgeted amount of CategoryA (i.e, add a 2000 expense)
  4. Try to "Cover overspending" and select the "To be budgeted" category
  5. Nothing happens

Where are you hosting Actual?

Docker

What browsers are you seeing the problem on?

Chrome

Operating System

Mac OSX

Originally created by @MrSkwiggs on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025). ### Verified issue does not already exist? - [x] I have searched and found no existing issue ### What happened? The option to cover overspending from the "To be budgeted" category does not work if the budget is already negative. https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/92c5d5c1-6f46-4a26-bd44-605e5d7ba4b8 ### How can we reproduce the issue? 1. Create a category (CategoryA) 2. Budget enough in CategoryA to turn the monthly budget negative (if 1000 income, budget 1500 in CategoryA) 3. Add some expenses above the budgeted amount of CategoryA (i.e, add a 2000 expense) 4. Try to "Cover overspending" and select the "To be budgeted" category 5. Nothing happens ### Where are you hosting Actual? Docker ### What browsers are you seeing the problem on? Chrome ### Operating System Mac OSX
GiteaMirror added the needs votesfeature labels 2026-02-28 19:58:29 -06:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:30 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@MikesGlitch commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025):

Hey @MrSkwiggs , can you confirm that this is fixed on edge? https://edge.actualbudget.org/

@MikesGlitch commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025): Hey @MrSkwiggs , can you confirm that this is fixed on edge? https://edge.actualbudget.org/
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:31 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@youngcw commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025):

Im pretty sure this has been the case basically forever. The app doesn't let you cover, if you have nothing to cover with.
(tested 24.6.0 and it isn't allowed at least that far back. I haven't looked by I imagine the code explicitly stops this)

I don't think this is a bug

@youngcw commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025): Im pretty sure this has been the case basically forever. The app doesn't let you cover, if you have nothing to cover with. (tested 24.6.0 and it isn't allowed at least that far back. I haven't looked by I imagine the code explicitly stops this) I don't think this is a bug
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:31 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jfdoming commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025):

Im pretty sure this has been the case basically forever. The app doesn't let you cover, if you have nothing to cover with. (tested 24.6.0 and it isn't allowed at least that far back. I haven't looked by I imagine the code explicitly stops this)

I don't think this is a bug

Agree, I don't think this is a bug. But maybe a feature request would be to grey out options that are negative

@jfdoming commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025): > Im pretty sure this has been the case basically forever. The app doesn't let you cover, if you have nothing to cover with. (tested 24.6.0 and it isn't allowed at least that far back. I haven't looked by I imagine the code explicitly stops this) > > I don't think this is a bug Agree, I don't think this is a bug. But maybe a feature request would be to grey out options that are negative
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:31 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025):

Im pretty sure this has been the case basically forever. The app doesn't let you cover, if you have nothing to cover with. (tested 24.6.0 and it isn't allowed at least that far back. I haven't looked by I imagine the code explicitly stops this)
I don't think this is a bug

Agree, I don't think this is a bug. But maybe a feature request would be to grey out options that are negative

Now you both mention it I remember this coming up in a review for a change I did a long while back but forgot to come back to. https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/3115#issuecomment-2249180541

I'll move this to a feature request.

@matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025): > > Im pretty sure this has been the case basically forever. The app doesn't let you cover, if you have nothing to cover with. (tested 24.6.0 and it isn't allowed at least that far back. I haven't looked by I imagine the code explicitly stops this) > > I don't think this is a bug > > Agree, I don't think this is a bug. But maybe a feature request would be to grey out options that are negative Now you both mention it I remember this coming up in a review for a change I did a long while back but forgot to come back to. https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/3115#issuecomment-2249180541 I'll move this to a feature request.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:32 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025):

✨ Thanks for sharing your idea! ✨

This repository uses lodash style issue management for enhancements. That means enhancement issues are automatically closed. This doesn’t mean we don’t accept feature requests, though! We will consider implementing ones that receive many upvotes, and we welcome contributions for any feature requests marked as needing votes (just post a comment first so we can help you make a successful contribution).

The enhancement backlog can be found here: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues?q=label%3A%22needs+votes%22+sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc+

Don’t forget to upvote the top comment with 👍!

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 2, 2025): :sparkles: Thanks for sharing your idea! :sparkles: This repository uses lodash style issue management for enhancements. That means enhancement issues are automatically closed. This doesn’t mean we don’t accept feature requests, though! We will consider implementing ones that receive many upvotes, and we welcome contributions for any feature requests marked as needing votes (just post a comment first so we can help you make a successful contribution). The enhancement backlog can be found here: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues?q=label%3A%22needs+votes%22+sort%3Areactions-%2B1-desc+ Don’t forget to upvote the top comment with 👍! <!-- feature-auto-close-comment -->
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 19:58:32 -06:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@MrSkwiggs commented on GitHub (Mar 3, 2025):

Thanks for the input all!
I see this was already closed and resolved in the hotfix that was just published.

While I understand your comments, I think it doesn't make sense to prevent this exact behaviour for (in my opinion) subjective reasons? The budget is already negative, why stop me from adding to that?

The way this works for me is that if any budget goes negative, then I just cover from different accounts that are off budget at the end of each month.
It's very common for me to keep adding to an already negative budget because in the end I have a clear picture of the accumulated debt, which then lets me know how much I need to send to cover everything...

Preventing me from easily doing this with one click feels a bit arbitrary here... and as far as I know, this is allowed on YNAB

@MrSkwiggs commented on GitHub (Mar 3, 2025): Thanks for the input all! I see this was already closed and resolved in the hotfix that was just published. While I understand your comments, I think it doesn't make sense to prevent this exact behaviour for (in my opinion) subjective reasons? The budget is already negative, why stop me from adding to that? The way this works for me is that if any budget goes negative, then I just cover from different accounts that are off budget at the end of each month. It's very common for me to keep adding to an already negative budget because in the end I have a clear picture of the accumulated debt, which then lets me know how much I need to send to cover everything... Preventing me from easily doing this with one click feels a bit arbitrary here... and as far as I know, this is allowed on YNAB
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
AI generated
API
bank sync
budgeting
bug
can’t replicate
dependencies
docker
documentation
electron
experimental feature
feature
feedback
goal templates
good first issue
help wanted
importers
maintenance
needs info
needs testing
needs triage
needs votes
openid
payees
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 regression
reports
responsive
rules
schedules
server
✨ merged
split transactions
tech debt
theme
transaction import
transaction reconciliation
transactions
translations
upstream
user interface
✅ approved
wontfix
No Label feature needs votes
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/actual#1919
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?