github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-05-06 07:01:45 -05:00
Code Issues 1.5k Packages Projects Releases 54 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #5154] Run rules on the other side of a manually created transfer. #51323

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-30 17:31:51 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 4 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-30 17:31:51 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @Rapha149 on GitHub (Jun 13, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/5154

Verified issue does not already exist?

  • I have searched and found no existing issue

What happened?

I have a rule set up that should automatically set the cleared status for transfer transactions on a specific account from a specific account: account is ... and payee is ... → set cleared to true.
But, when the transactions are automatically created because another rule is marking a transaction as a transfer or even when I'm manually creating a transfer, the rule doesn't apply. When I manually go to the account, select the transaction and do "Run rules", the transaction is marked as cleared.
I have tested this with a pre, default and post rule and also with setting other things like notes.

How can we reproduce the issue?

  • Create a rule like this: account is X and payee is Y → set cleared to true
  • Create a transaction on the Y account with the X as the payee
  • A transaction is automatically created on the X account with Y as the payee but it's not marked as cleared

Where are you hosting Actual?

Docker

What browsers are you seeing the problem on?

Firefox, Desktop App (Electron)

Operating System

Linux, Android

Originally created by @Rapha149 on GitHub (Jun 13, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/5154 ### Verified issue does not already exist? - [x] I have searched and found no existing issue ### What happened? I have a rule set up that should automatically set the `cleared` status for transfer transactions on a specific account from a specific account: `account is ... and payee is ... → set cleared to true`. But, when the transactions are automatically created because another rule is marking a transaction as a transfer or even when I'm manually creating a transfer, the rule doesn't apply. When I manually go to the account, select the transaction and do "Run rules", the transaction is marked as cleared. I have tested this with a pre, default and post rule and also with setting other things like notes. ### How can we reproduce the issue? - Create a rule like this: `account is X and payee is Y → set cleared to true` - Create a transaction on the `Y` account with the `X` as the payee - A transaction is automatically created on the `X` account with `Y` as the payee but it's not marked as cleared ### Where are you hosting Actual? Docker ### What browsers are you seeing the problem on? Firefox, Desktop App (Electron) ### Operating System Linux, Android
GiteaMirror added the feature label 2026-04-30 17:31:51 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-30 17:32:08 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Mansarde commented on GitHub (Jun 14, 2025):

Just tried it out and can confirm.

So basically, only the account where the transfer is created in will have rules applied to it.
But the other side of a transfer won't have rules applied to it automatically.
(At least when it comes to the clear/unclear field)

<!-- gh-comment-id:2972819688 --> @Mansarde commented on GitHub (Jun 14, 2025): Just tried it out and can confirm. So basically, only the account where the transfer is *created in* will have rules applied to it. But the other side of a transfer *won't* have rules applied to it automatically. (At least when it comes to the clear/unclear field)
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-30 17:32:09 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@youngcw commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2025):

Im going to move this to a feature request

<!-- gh-comment-id:2973444077 --> @youngcw commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2025): Im going to move this to a feature request
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-30 17:32:10 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 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 👍!

<!-- gh-comment-id:2973444444 --> @github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 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 2026-04-30 17:32:10 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jul 7, 2025):

🎉 This feature has been implemented in #5279 and will be released in the next version. Thanks for sharing your idea! 🎉

<!-- gh-comment-id:3045962346 --> @github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jul 7, 2025): :tada: This feature has been implemented in #5279 and will be released in the next version. Thanks for sharing your idea! :tada: <!-- feature-implemented-comment -->
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
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#51323
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?