I’m using v22.7.31.233 and when I clone an invoice that has been marked as closed, the checkbox “Closed invoice” is not visible on the initial edit screen. Only after saving the new invoice and editing it again can I see this checkbox and uncheck it.
I think it would be more logically if any new invoice is never automatically set to be closed, regardless of it being a clone or not.
However, I would be happy to just have the option to uncheck the box for “Closed invoice” when making a clone.
I understand that it is now possible to make recurring sales/purchase invoices and I applaud that functionality. Nevertheless, some invoices are very similar while not coming on a regular interval and for those it would be nice to be able to duplicate them without having them automatically be marked as closed.
EDITS
I guess I was wrong about the last paragraph, so crossed it out.
Changed “duplicate” to “clone” (I was going off the Dutch button, which is “dupliceren”)
Changed title to better convey what’s wrong, using the right English terminology
A solution is to copy an invoice, but I think my point is still valid: Having an edit screen where you can’t set something that is applied in the background only to be available if you go back to the edit screen is bad UI/UX design.
That is as it should be. When you clone or copy an invoice, the new transaction does not yet exist in the data file, so it cannot be closed. You aren’t just “saving” the new transaction, you are creating it.
What I wonder is how you are seeing a closed invoice to clone or copy it. When I look at closed invoies in v22.7.31, they don’t display. That’s a bug. I will create a separate bug report.
That has been available for years. The feature is not new.
So far as I can tell, they are not. Although you cannot View a closed invoice due to the bug mentioned above, you can still clone it. The cloned invoice is not closed.
So far as I can tell, they are not. Although you cannot View a closed invoice due to the bug mentioned above, you can still clone it. The cloned invoice is not closed.
Thank you for the response. I have no problem viewing closed invoices, it is not buggy for me. Perhaps that’s something to do with my custom theme?
When I clone a closed invoice the clone is also closed. This is the whole point of my post If that is not happening for you, is there then perhaps a setting to stop it from doing that?
EDIT: If you want a video of this happening, I’m happy to provide one directly to a developer. I’d rather not post it on a public forum as there will be personal information in it.
Ah, you’ve revealed something I did not know. I happened to look at a closed invoice with a custom theme that had been deleted. When reverting to the default theme, it displays. So I will cancel the bug report I just submitted.
Here is the explanation for the behavior you see:
A clone is an exact copy with only one exception. If you have Form Defaults set for automatic reference numbering, the clone will have a new reference number. This is for compliance with requirements in some jurisdictions. Thus, if the source was closed, the clone will be closed.
However, you can copy the closed invoice to a new invoice. Under the developer’s philosophy of “dumb clones, smart copies,” the copy will not be closed after being created.
Let me also amplify on my final statement in post #2 above. The cloned invoice is not closed on the initial Edit screen because, as I said, it does not yet exist. But after being created, it is closed.
Anyway, the solution for you is to copy sales invoices if they are closed rather than clone them. (Your use of the term duplicate was not precise, because there are two methods for duplicating a transaction that produce slightly different results.)
Honestly, I never used the copy to method, because back when I started using this software it didn’t do what I was expecting it to. Revisiting it now, it seems to work. Thank you for providing a solution that was right in front of me
My apologies for the use of the term “duplicate”, because that is the English translation of the button I see in my Dutch version (“Dupliceren”). I didn’t realise the English version uses another term.
I understand this behaviour from a programming perspective, but from a user perspective, when would you ever want this functionality? Also, as there is an exception for the reference number, because it is assumed to be a new invoice for compliance, why wouldn’t a similar exception for the closed status be applicable?
The problem I have with the current functionality is that it is not transparent to the user. I clone an invoice, get an edit screen where I can edit whatever I need for the clone, but have no control over whether it is closed or opened. It would then seems much more logical to me for it to be an open invoice, as it is a new invoice, albeit a clone. Either that, or the option to uncheck the closed checkbox.
Having an edit screen where you can’t set something that is applied in the background only to be available if you go back to the edit screen is bad UI/UX design.
Ever since the copy to function has changed to what it is now and thus much more useful the question should be asked why still having the clone button at all. I have been trying to find use cases that would give clone a purpose better than copy to and can not identify it. Also as indicated here what is the benefit of cloning something that is inactive?
I think that where clone is useful and no copy to exists such as in Inventory Items it stays and where copy to exists to remove the clone button.
Because when the Copy to feature was added, users demanded features of Clone be retained. There was a lengthy discussion in the forum, which you can look up if you are interested in various reasons. Essentially, things boiled down to some users wanting an exact copy and others wanting updated information (such as new dates, current pricing, etc.) One of the key examples was preparation of common invoices, where you could generate one invoice for a month, with the desired date and prices, then clone it and have only to change the supplier or customer. Thus, a static clone was preferable to having to modify dates and prices on every one. At the same time, users who were, for example, paying bills that did not change didn’t want to have to update to the current date.
That led to the current philosophy of “dumb clones, smart copies.”
If that is not happening for you, is there then perhaps a setting to stop it from doing that?