github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-07-15 22:54:03 -05:00
Code Issues 3.0k Packages Projects Releases 58 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #2515] [Feature] Ability to disable automatic rules #90638

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-05-25 19:36:41 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 7 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:41 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @willoma on GitHub (Mar 29, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/2515

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?

Actual creates rules automatically when it detects we apply the same category to a payee. This has never helped me, because I already have adequate rules, and when I didn't set rules, it means I need to select manually.

Here is one of my real-life example. My wife works in animation for children. During holidays, our kids go there. So we have the same "payee" for her salary and for our kids holidays activities. I have a rule for her salary (based on the payee and the approximate amount), and no rule for the holidays activities (because sometimes there is also exceptional expenses relative to her job, or reimbursements from her employer, etc). But Actual keeps creating a rule that applies this payee to the "kids holidays" category, therefore her salary is categorized in "kids holidays". And when I remove this automatic rule, it reappears a few weeks/months later because there were kids holidays inbetween...

Describe your ideal solution to this problem

A checkbox in the configuration in order to disable the automatic rule feature.

Teaching and learning

No response

Originally created by @willoma on GitHub (Mar 29, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/2515 ### Verified feature request does not already exist? - [X] I have searched and found no existing issue ### 💻 - [ ] Would you like to implement this feature? ### Pitch: what problem are you trying to solve? Actual creates rules automatically when it detects we apply the same category to a payee. This has never helped me, because I already have adequate rules, and when I didn't set rules, it means I need to select manually. Here is one of my real-life example. My wife works in animation for children. During holidays, our kids go there. So we have the same "payee" for her salary and for our kids holidays activities. I have a rule for her salary (based on the payee and the approximate amount), and no rule for the holidays activities (because sometimes there is also exceptional expenses relative to her job, or reimbursements from her employer, etc). But Actual keeps creating a rule that applies this payee to the "kids holidays" category, therefore her salary is categorized in "kids holidays". And when I remove this automatic rule, it reappears a few weeks/months later because there were kids holidays inbetween... ### Describe your ideal solution to this problem A checkbox in the configuration in order to disable the automatic rule feature. ### Teaching and learning _No response_
GiteaMirror added the feature label 2026-05-25 19:36:41 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:42 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 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:2026938575 --> @github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 29, 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 2026-05-25 19:36:43 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@spuxx-dev commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2024):

Hey. I also don't really like the automatic creation of rules. I've found that the rules that are being created are often times problematic. For example, when the Payee is a generic fintech like paypal and I categorize a couple of paypal transactions as "Food", actual will automatically create a rule that categorizes paypal transactions as "Food", which is obvious nonsense. The behavior has lead me to check my rules everytime I have categorized some transactions manually, looking for rules with a single condition and deleting them. This makes things harder for me, not easier. I would really like to be able to disable this behavior.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2336788270 --> @spuxx-dev commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2024): Hey. I also don't really like the automatic creation of rules. I've found that the rules that are being created are often times problematic. For example, when the Payee is a generic fintech like paypal and I categorize a couple of paypal transactions as "Food", actual will automatically create a rule that categorizes paypal transactions as "Food", which is obvious nonsense. The behavior has lead me to check my rules everytime I have categorized some transactions manually, looking for rules with a single condition and deleting them. This makes things harder for me, not easier. I would really like to be able to disable this behavior.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:44 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@spuxx-dev commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2024):

Also, I'd be willing to give implementing this a try. :)

<!-- gh-comment-id:2336789958 --> @spuxx-dev commented on GitHub (Sep 8, 2024): Also, I'd be willing to give implementing this a try. :)
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:45 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mrkwnzl commented on GitHub (Oct 4, 2024):

From #3560, to keep things more organized and in one place. I wrote down my issue with it based on the current intended solutions as I understand them and why they don’t really work for me. Thank you!

For payees with changing categories, the creation of automatic rules is rather hindering instead of helpful. The current solution is to have certain payees that get a post rule with an empty category, but that doesn’t help with all payees, as some get other rules for categorizing and a post rule would overwrite the rule I actually want. So the solution there would be to create other post rules that are more specific. The better solution would be to simply disable the automatic creation of rules, as I can then create the rules I want the way I want.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2393420930 --> @mrkwnzl commented on GitHub (Oct 4, 2024): From #3560, to keep things more organized and in one place. I wrote down my issue with it based on the current intended solutions as I understand them and why they don’t really work for me. Thank you! > For payees with changing categories, the creation of automatic rules is rather hindering instead of helpful. The current solution is to have certain payees that get a post rule with an empty category, but that doesn’t help with all payees, as some get other rules for categorizing and a post rule would overwrite the rule I actually want. So the solution there would be to create other post rules that are more specific. The better solution would be to simply disable the automatic creation of rules, as I can then create the rules I want the way I want.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:47 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@thecount2a commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2024):

I'm very happy to find this issue here, the automatic rules feature is really messing up my data. Why does it create a rule without even asking for confirmation that a rule ought to be created? Regardless, it would be GREAT to be able to disable the feature. I create my own rules so I don't want to just accumulate sneaky rules that have already corrupted my data, I just don't want the rules to be created in the first place. I actually think this should be the default behavior to have automatic rule creation off, to avoid changing people's data who (like me) had no idea that the automatic rules feature existed. Then they can manually turn it on, or at least pop up a confirmation dialog that asks whether to create the rule or not.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2467144103 --> @thecount2a commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2024): I'm very happy to find this issue here, the automatic rules feature is really messing up my data. Why does it create a rule without even asking for confirmation that a rule ought to be created? Regardless, it would be GREAT to be able to disable the feature. I create my own rules so I don't want to just accumulate sneaky rules that have already corrupted my data, I just don't want the rules to be created in the first place. I actually think this should be the default behavior to have automatic rule creation off, to avoid changing people's data who (like me) had no idea that the automatic rules feature existed. Then they can manually turn it on, or at least pop up a confirmation dialog that asks whether to create the rule or not.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:47 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mullermn commented on GitHub (Jan 9, 2025):

Amazon is another use case that will be very common among users. I have had to add in another rule to put a 'to review' flag in the description to work around this, but it's ugly and these transactions don't show up in the 'to be categorised' view.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2579837406 --> @mullermn commented on GitHub (Jan 9, 2025): Amazon is another use case that will be very common among users. I have had to add in another rule to put a 'to review' flag in the description to work around this, but it's ugly and these transactions don't show up in the 'to be categorised' view.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-05-25 19:36:48 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Jan 29, 2025):

Added in https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/4081

<!-- gh-comment-id:2621714679 --> @matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Jan 29, 2025): Added in https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/4081
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
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#90638
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?