Sage 100

I have to scratch this itch again so I am bringing back for comment.  Since the account key is central, does anyone have any technical reason why we just can't insert a segment?  I understand since Sage had such a difficult time with the reversing date concept IDEA request at the MOTM conference this request might be out of reach.  Trying to determine if this is truly a technical issue or just a programmer inertia problem.

One example where this would be a problem is the IM option for GL segment to use for warehouse specific accounts.  It just references the segment number and inserting a segment would throw that off.  Any other feature / enhancement that references a segment number in a similar way would break by allowing inserted segments.

I have to scratch this itch again so I am bringing back for comment.  Since the account key is central, does anyone have any technical reason why we just can't insert a segment?  I understand since Sage had such a difficult time with the reversing date concept IDEA request at the MOTM conference this request might be out of reach.  Trying to determine if this is truly a technical issue or just a programmer inertia problem.

There is also the fact that later reviewing GL PDF reports with the old account structure, it could be difficult to understand what the old account segments were referring to.

NNNN-NN

to

NNNN-NN-NN

Where the second NN is new, and the third NN is the old second segment.  If that was allowed, it would be... bad (IMO).

One example where this would be a problem is the IM option for GL segment to use for warehouse specific accounts.  It just references the segment number and inserting a segment would throw that off.  Any other feature / enhancement that references a segment number in a similar way would break by allowing inserted segments.

I have to scratch this itch again so I am bringing back for comment.  Since the account key is central, does anyone have any technical reason why we just can't insert a segment?  I understand since Sage had such a difficult time with the reversing date concept IDEA request at the MOTM conference this request might be out of reach.  Trying to determine if this is truly a technical issue or just a programmer inertia problem.

Wouldn't the workaround be to just change the segment when you go live?  Regarding old PDF's, you have the ability to run the transaction register by source as well as rerun any other GL reports.  

There is also the fact that later reviewing GL PDF reports with the old account structure, it could be difficult to understand what the old account segments were referring to.

NNNN-NN

to

NNNN-NN-NN

Where the second NN is new, and the third NN is the old second segment.  If that was allowed, it would be... bad (IMO).

One example where this would be a problem is the IM option for GL segment to use for warehouse specific accounts.  It just references the segment number and inserting a segment would throw that off.  Any other feature / enhancement that references a segment number in a similar way would break by allowing inserted segments.

I have to scratch this itch again so I am bringing back for comment.  Since the account key is central, does anyone have any technical reason why we just can't insert a segment?  I understand since Sage had such a difficult time with the reversing date concept IDEA request at the MOTM conference this request might be out of reach.  Trying to determine if this is truly a technical issue or just a programmer inertia problem.

You asked if there were technical reasons... IMO, there are.  Can they be dealt with?  Sure... most things can... but why?  I'd rather Sage programmers spend their time on things that matter more.

Wouldn't the workaround be to just change the segment when you go live?  Regarding old PDF's, you have the ability to run the transaction register by source as well as rerun any other GL reports.  

There is also the fact that later reviewing GL PDF reports with the old account structure, it could be difficult to understand what the old account segments were referring to.

NNNN-NN

to

NNNN-NN-NN

Where the second NN is new, and the third NN is the old second segment.  If that was allowed, it would be... bad (IMO).

One example where this would be a problem is the IM option for GL segment to use for warehouse specific accounts.  It just references the segment number and inserting a segment would throw that off.  Any other feature / enhancement that references a segment number in a similar way would break by allowing inserted segments.

I have to scratch this itch again so I am bringing back for comment.  Since the account key is central, does anyone have any technical reason why we just can't insert a segment?  I understand since Sage had such a difficult time with the reversing date concept IDEA request at the MOTM conference this request might be out of reach.  Trying to determine if this is truly a technical issue or just a programmer inertia problem.

I asked for technical (programming) reasons that prevents Sage from allowing a simple insertion between segments.  Not gotchas that you should be aware of and easily resolved. if you did.  And yes, I think we all have ideas better served by the programmers.  That is the purpose of the Ideation tab.  Companies do outgrow their GL structure and need the ability to expand it.  Sage did provide that utility 15 plus years ago.  It works, just as long as you add the segment at the end.  It works for most users, but some ask questions why segments can't be inserted.  I am currently dealing second and third client asking the question.  The first one is transitioning away from Sage because they didn't like the response Sage gave them - NO.

You asked if there were technical reasons... IMO, there are.  Can they be dealt with?  Sure... most things can... but why?  I'd rather Sage programmers spend their time on things that matter more.

Wouldn't the workaround be to just change the segment when you go live?  Regarding old PDF's, you have the ability to run the transaction register by source as well as rerun any other GL reports.  

There is also the fact that later reviewing GL PDF reports with the old account structure, it could be difficult to understand what the old account segments were referring to.

NNNN-NN

to

NNNN-NN-NN

Where the second NN is new, and the third NN is the old second segment.  If that was allowed, it would be... bad (IMO).

One example where this would be a problem is the IM option for GL segment to use for warehouse specific accounts.  It just references the segment number and inserting a segment would throw that off.  Any other feature / enhancement that references a segment number in a similar way would break by allowing inserted segments.

I have to scratch this itch again so I am bringing back for comment.  Since the account key is central, does anyone have any technical reason why we just can't insert a segment?  I understand since Sage had such a difficult time with the reversing date concept IDEA request at the MOTM conference this request might be out of reach.  Trying to determine if this is truly a technical issue or just a programmer inertia problem.