github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-07-11 10:02:07 -05:00
Code Issues 3.0k Packages Projects Releases 58 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #2437] [Feature] Extend goal templates to calculate percentages of available funds taking into account the priority level #7913

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-10 18:02:22 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 2 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-10 18:02:22 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @thennekx on GitHub (Mar 7, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/2437

Verified feature request does not already exist?

  • I have searched and found no existing issue

💻

  • Would you like to implement this feature?

Pitch: what problem are you trying to solve?

The current behavior of setting a percentage of available funds does not take into account priorities set.
Priorities thus currently have no effect on the amount that is getting budgetted but rather on when it is budgetted.
This feature request is to have the option to also take into account priorities when budgetting a percentage of available funds.

The downside of current approach is that 1% of available funds on priority 99 is getting just as much budget than on priority 0.

    Requested behavior   Current behavior  
  % of available funds Assigned Available funds Assigned Available funds
Start     1000   1000
Priority 1 50% 500 500 500 Not recalculated
Priority 2 10% 50 450 100 Not recalculated
Priority 3 10% 45 405 100 Not recalculated
Priority 4 10% 40,5 364,5 100 Not recalculated

For more details and history see the issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/2426

Describe your ideal solution to this problem

To remain backwards compatible, the current approach can be kept, as it was a deliberate choice for easier manual calculation.
For clarity towards the end user there are multiple options:

  1. A new keyword could be added like "% of available budget"
  2. The existing keyword can be extended like "% of available funds prioritized"

Teaching and learning

For simplicity to the end user a new keyword might cause less confusion and it can be explicitly mentioned that it takes into account priorities.

Originally created by @thennekx on GitHub (Mar 7, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/2437 ### Verified feature request does not already exist? - [X] I have searched and found no existing issue ### 💻 - [X] Would you like to implement this feature? ### Pitch: what problem are you trying to solve? The current behavior of setting a percentage of available funds does not take into account priorities set. Priorities thus currently have no effect on the amount that is getting budgetted but rather on when it is budgetted. This feature request is to have the option to also take into account priorities when budgetting a percentage of available funds. The downside of current approach is that 1% of available funds on priority 99 is getting just as much budget than on priority 0.   |   | Requested behavior |   | Current behavior |   -- | -- | -- | -- | -- | --   | % of available funds | Assigned | Available funds | Assigned | Available funds Start |   |   | 1000 |   | 1000 Priority 1 | 50% | 500 | 500 | 500 | Not recalculated Priority 2 | 10% | 50 | 450 | 100 | Not recalculated Priority 3 | 10% | 45 | 405 | 100 | Not recalculated Priority 4 | 10% | 40,5 | 364,5 | 100 | Not recalculated For more details and history see the issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/2426 ### Describe your ideal solution to this problem To remain backwards compatible, the current approach can be kept, as it was a deliberate choice for easier manual calculation. For clarity towards the end user there are multiple options: 1. A new keyword could be added like "% of available budget" 2. The existing keyword can be extended like "% of available funds prioritized" ### Teaching and learning For simplicity to the end user a new keyword might cause less confusion and it can be explicitly mentioned that it takes into account priorities.
GiteaMirror added the goal templatesfeature labels 2026-04-10 18:02:22 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-10 18:02:23 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 7, 2024):

✨ 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:1984257473 --> @github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 7, 2024): :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 2026-04-10 18:02:24 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2024):

🎉 This feature has been implemented in #3754 and will be released in the next version. Thanks for sharing your idea! 🎉

<!-- gh-comment-id:2455421325 --> @github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2024): :tada: This feature has been implemented in #3754 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
tech-support
theme
transaction import
transaction reconciliation
transactions
translations
upstream
user interface
✅ approved
wontfix
No Label feature goal templates
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#7913
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?