Issue #51 describes at least a few undocumented bitcoin.tax issues:
- Bicoin.tax gives unexpected cost-basis results when `Fee` is given
with `Total` (when `Total` is given in place of `Price`). The
expectation is that bitcoin.tax will perform the cost-basis
calculation on `Total` when `Fee` is also given.
However, bitcoin.tax *will* give expected cost-basis results if
`Price` is given in place of `Total` (with `Fee` also given) *or* if
`Total` is given *after* local cost-basis adjustments are made (but
*without* `Fee` given).
The rationale for why docker-finance doesn't use `Price`:
* docker-finance has all of the `Total`s; so `Price` isn't
necessary.
* Local price information isn't available for most trades (and
shouldn't be necessary since all `Total`s are available).
- Additionally, when `Fee` is non-fiat (crypto), it now must be marked
as a SPEND in order to be disposed (and to produce an accurate
closing report).
- Finally, if `FeeCurrency` *does* not match either `Symbol` or
`Currency` (e.g., BTC-ETH w/ BNB fee), it's unknown if cost-basis
must be calculated locally as well (if `Total` is given). Local
calculations cannot be done because `Fee` price information is
(almost certainly) not available for this type of trade.
Until upstream can assert that attaching the `Fee` will subsequently
adjust the cost-basis of `Total` *and* dispose of the `Fee` in the
process (while also allowing `Total` to be used in place of `Price`),
the `Fee` (and `FeeCurrency`) column(s) must not be populated and values
instead moved to SPEND (as described above).
Upstream is aware of these issues (since May) and they're in the process
of resolution. In the meantime, docker-finance work-arounds should
suffice for all trades that have a fiat `Fee` and/or a
`Fee`/`FeeCurrency` that matches one side of the trading pair.
Issue #51 describes at least a few undocumented bitcoin.tax issues:
- Bicoin.tax gives unexpected cost-basis results when `Fee` is given
with `Total` (when `Total` is given in place of `Price`). The
expectation is that bitcoin.tax will perform the cost-basis
calculation on `Total` when `Fee` is also given.
However, bitcoin.tax *will* give expected cost-basis results if
`Price` is given in place of `Total` (with `Fee` also given) *or* if
`Total` is given *after* local cost-basis adjustments are made (but
*without* `Fee` given).
The rationale for why docker-finance doesn't use `Price`:
* docker-finance has all of the `Total`s; so `Price` isn't
necessary.
* Local price information isn't available for most trades (and
shouldn't be necessary since all `Total`s are available).
- Additionally, when `Fee` is non-fiat (crypto), it now must be marked
as a SPEND in order to be disposed (and to produce an accurate
closing report).
- Finally, if `FeeCurrency` *does* not match either `Symbol` or
`Currency` (e.g., BTC-ETH w/ BNB fee), it's unknown if cost-basis
must be calculated locally as well (if `Total` is given). Local
calculations cannot be done because `Fee` price information is
(almost certainly) not available for this type of trade.
Until upstream can assert that attaching the `Fee` will subsequently
adjust the cost-basis of `Total` *and* dispose of the `Fee` in the
process (while also allowing `Total` to be used in place of `Price`),
the `Fee` (and `FeeCurrency`) column(s) must not be populated and values
instead moved to SPEND (as described above).
Upstream is aware of these issues (since May) and they're in the process
of resolution. In the meantime, docker-finance work-arounds should
suffice for all trades that have a fiat `Fee` and/or a
`Fee`/`FeeCurrency` that matches one side of the trading pair.
Issue #51 describes at least a few undocumented bitcoin.tax issues:
- Bicoin.tax gives unexpected cost-basis results when `Fee` is given
with `Total` (when `Total` is given in place of `Price`). The
expectation is that bitcoin.tax will perform the cost-basis
calculation on `Total` when `Fee` is also given.
However, bitcoin.tax *will* give expected cost-basis results if
`Price` is given in place of `Total` (with `Fee` also given) *or* if
`Total` is given *after* local cost-basis adjustments are made (but
*without* `Fee` given).
The rationale for why docker-finance doesn't use `Price`:
* docker-finance has all of the `Total`s; so `Price` isn't
necessary.
* Local price information isn't available for most trades (and
shouldn't be necessary since all `Total`s are available).
- Additionally, when `Fee` is non-fiat (crypto), it now must be marked
as a SPEND in order to be disposed (and to produce an accurate
closing report).
- Finally, if `FeeCurrency` *does* not match either `Symbol` or
`Currency` (e.g., BTC-ETH w/ BNB fee), it's unknown if cost-basis
must be calculated locally as well (if `Total` is given). Local
calculations cannot be done because `Fee` price information is
(almost certainly) not available for this type of trade.
Until upstream can assert that attaching the `Fee` will subsequently
adjust the cost-basis of `Total` *and* dispose of the `Fee` in the
process (while also allowing `Total` to be used in place of `Price`),
the `Fee` (and `FeeCurrency`) column(s) must not be populated and values
instead moved to SPEND (as described above).
Upstream is aware of these issues (since May) and they're in the process
of resolution. In the meantime, docker-finance work-arounds should
suffice for all trades that have a fiat `Fee` and/or a
`Fee`/`FeeCurrency` that matches one side of the trading pair.
- Make known that non-zero returns are fatal errors
- Return success on success (iadd | manual)
- Add iadd to `edit` usage help
- Remove outdated comments
A recent combination of Coinbase and ccxt changes will now result in
authentication errors (server error 401) because of docker-finance's
coinbase implementation (specifically, direct calls to internal ccxt).
docker-finance's previous usage of request() meant hooking into the
underlying ccxt API and not the end-user public-facing API (publicly
documented - not necessarily the "public" vs "private" APIs provided by
exchanges, as seen in ccxt documentation).
This direct usage of request() was obviously never recommended but it
was always easier to interact with to get to the underlying raw object
(at least at the time of original docker-finance coinbase writing).
Since it appears that ccxt has refactored the authentication mechanism
related to request(), this commit also refactors in order to provide a
working fix for authentication.
The original intent of the `ledger` facade was to describe a general
purpose "ledger" command abstraction; not specifically the `ledger`
software (predecessor to hledger) nor the `ledger` hardware device.
As `hledger` is currently the exclusive internal "ledger" component,
adding `hledger` as an alias seems to be an appropriate-enough addition
that won't break existing abstraction/functionality.
- Fetch from all available price APIs within a single command
* allows passing multiple CLI APIs to `api` argument
* will now fetch from all available APIs if `api` is not given
* will warn if API config block is missing or die of no APIs are found
- Related refactoring
