Just now I’ve found one editable capability beyond locked date.
Lock Date is 30/11/2022
I made an entry(purchase invoice) on 25/10/2022 (unlock the date for this entry and locked it again)
And when I found it a wrong entry I wanted to delete it.
Instead of unlock the date and go to that purchase invoice and delete it, I went to history of that invoice creation and undo it.
I was able to remove it without any changes on the lock date status.
My question is: the lock date is restricting changes based on the “document date” or it’s “creation date”.
In my case the document date is 25th October - Lock Date 30th November - Document created 19th December(which is after locked date)
The history button is reserved for only Admin and Restricted Users with full access. If you do not want users to be able to make changes through the History button, do not make them admins or give them full access.
Thank you @Abeiku for your attention on this topic.
what you’ve said is correct and I’m also aware of it.
But my question was, The lock date function is working on which date basis? Document date or it’s creation date?
The Lock date uses the Document date. It disallows changes to the accounts on or before a chosen date.
That’s good to hear.
Then how can it allows to make any changes before chosen date without even a warning about the locked period status (whether it is admin or not, admin also should be warned/alerted that he is making some changes inside the locked date)
A warning that undoing an entry made before the lock date is a good idea. I cannot add it to ideas though because only users with full access and admins could make changes to locked periods. Let’s see what others have to say.
Very Sure it is not a bad idea.
And what I’ve pointed out here is not a big issue. Just I wanted it to come to @lubos attention that there is a loophole which will not simply reveal itself. I came across an experience and register it here(which I believe I should do as a contribution to this great great application’s best future).
@Abeiku , I did not object your points in any means, indeed I really appreciate all your feedback on this matter.