[18.0][MIG] sale_blanket_order#3642
Conversation
AaronHForgeFlow
left a comment
AaronHForgeFlow
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for the supersede and include all the improvements!
It works fine, just some minor comments.
| <xpath expr="//field[@name='order_line']" position="before"> | ||
| <field name="disable_adding_lines" invisible="1" /> | ||
| </xpath> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this is not necessary, it works without that in v18
| <xpath expr="//field[@name='order_line']" position="before"> | |
| <field name="disable_adding_lines" invisible="1" /> | |
| </xpath> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
During functional testing I can confirm this part is required.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@IsabelAForgeFlow can you add this part back? sorry I made you change it before.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, the forward port of this: #3620 does not work right away in v18. I am working in the adaptation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It came out that the create attribute cannot be dynamically changed like it was, it has to be done using js patches, I just did.
| <xpath | ||
| expr="//field[@name='order_line']//list/field[@name='product_id']" | ||
| position="after" | ||
| > | ||
| <field | ||
| name="blanket_order_line" | ||
| context="{'from_sale_order': True}" | ||
| column_invisible="not parent.blanket_order_id" | ||
| /> | ||
| </xpath> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <xpath | |
| expr="//field[@name='order_line']//list/field[@name='product_id']" | |
| position="after" | |
| > | |
| <field | |
| name="blanket_order_line" | |
| context="{'from_sale_order': True}" | |
| column_invisible="not parent.blanket_order_id" | |
| /> | |
| </xpath> |
I think this is not necessary, it works without that in v18
| <field name="arch" type="xml"> | ||
| <list create="false"> | ||
| <field name="sequence" widget="handle" /> | ||
| <field name="name" invisible="1" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <field name="name" invisible="1" /> |
I think this can be removed as well
| name="product_id" | ||
| context="{'partner_id':parent.partner_id, 'quantity':original_uom_qty, 'company_id': company_id}" | ||
| /> | ||
| <field name="product_uom" invisible="1" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| <field name="product_uom" invisible="1" /> | |
| <field name="product_uom" invisible="1" /> |
I think this is also not necessary
| ) | ||
| if blanket_order.state == "expired": | ||
| raise UserError( | ||
| _("You can't create a sale order from " "an expired blanket order!") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| _("You can't create a sale order from " "an expired blanket order!") | |
| self.env._("You can't create a sale order from " "an expired blanket order!") |
| ) | ||
| line_company_id = line.company_id and line.company_id.id or False | ||
| if company_id is not False and line_company_id != company_id: | ||
| raise UserError(_("You have to select lines " "from the same company.")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| raise UserError(_("You have to select lines " "from the same company.")) | |
| raise UserError(self.env._("You have to select lines " "from the same company.")) |
| payment_term_id = 0 | ||
| for line in self.line_ids.filtered(lambda line: line.qty != 0.0): | ||
| if line.qty > line.remaining_uom_qty: | ||
| raise UserError(_("You can't order more than the remaining quantities")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| raise UserError(_("You can't order more than the remaining quantities")) | |
| raise UserError(self.env._("You can't order more than the remaining quantities")) |
| payment_term_id = False | ||
|
|
||
| if not order_lines_by_customer: | ||
| raise UserError(_("An order can't be empty")) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| raise UserError(_("An order can't be empty")) | |
| raise UserError(self.env._("An order can't be empty")) |
|
|
||
| if not currency_id: | ||
| raise UserError( | ||
| _( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| _( | |
| self.env._( |
| res.append(sale_order.id) | ||
| return { | ||
| "domain": [("id", "in", res)], | ||
| "name": _("Sales Orders"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "name": _("Sales Orders"), | |
| "name": self.env._("Sales Orders"), |
IsabelAForgeFlow
force-pushed
the
18.0-mig-sale_blanket_order
branch
2 times, most recently
from
68781a9 to
836a13a
Compare
|
@IsabelAForgeFlow Could you move to https://github.com/OCA/sale-blanket ? And consider checking behavior of new approach : OCA/sale-blanket#2 Thanks. |
IsabelAForgeFlow
force-pushed
the
18.0-mig-sale_blanket_order
branch
from
836a13a to
e5a2fb5
Compare
| <t t-set="current_subtotal" t-value="0" /> | ||
| <t t-foreach="doc.line_ids" t-as="l"> | ||
| <t | ||
| t-set="current_subtotal" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Noticed that the current_subtotal amount is being counted twice, which is wrong.
It should be counted only once:
<t t-set="current_subtotal" t-value="current_subtotal + l.price_subtotal"/>
Also remove the groups - it no longer exists
| groups="account.group_show_line_subtotals_tax_included" | ||
| /> | ||
| <tr | ||
| t-att-class="'bg-200 fw-bold o_line_section' if l.display_type == 'line_section' else 'fst-italic o_line_note' if l.display_type == 'line_note' else ''" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe remove bg-200 - line sections does look better without the gray background imo
| /> | ||
| </td> | ||
| </t> | ||
| <t t-if="l.display_type == 'line_section'"> |
| <t t-set="current_section" t-value="l" /> | ||
| <t t-set="current_subtotal" t-value="0" /> | ||
| </t> | ||
| <t t-if="l.display_type == 'line_note'"> |
| _name = "sale.blanket.order.line" | ||
| _description = "Blanket Order Line" | ||
| _inherit = ["mail.thread", "mail.activity.mixin", "analytic.mixin"] | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please add _order = "sequence, id" or _order = "order_id, sequence, id" otherwise changing the sequence of the order lines (e.g. line section or line note) will not correspond when printing the report pdf
|
/ocabot migration sale_blanket_order |
|
The migration issue (#3344) has not been updated to reference the current pull request because a previous pull request (#3370) is not closed. |
|
@IsabelAForgeFlow Could you improve migration commit message ? Thanks
|
When duplicating a confirmed blanket order, the new copy shouldn't keep the state nor the sequence number (name).
Steps to reproduce: * create and confirm a blanket order (BO) with (product A, qty 30) and (product B, qty 20) * from the BO create a SO with (product A, qty 10) and (product B, qty 10) * from the BO create a SO with (product A, qty 20) and (product B, qty 0) * from the BO create another SO with (product B, qty 10) Current behavior: It raises the exception "The sale has already been completed.". Expected behavior: No exception is raised.
Currently translated at 7.1% (11 of 154 strings) Translation: sale-workflow-12.0/sale-workflow-12.0-sale_blanket_order Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/sale-workflow-12-0/sale-workflow-12-0-sale_blanket_order/de/
exactly like in sales orders.
Updated by "Update PO files to match POT (msgmerge)" hook in Weblate. Translation: sale-workflow-17.0/sale-workflow-17.0-sale_blanket_order Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/sale-workflow-17-0/sale-workflow-17-0-sale_blanket_order/
Currently translated at 100.0% (169 of 169 strings) Translation: sale-workflow-17.0/sale-workflow-17.0-sale_blanket_order Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/sale-workflow-17-0/sale-workflow-17-0-sale_blanket_order/it/
IsabelAForgeFlow
force-pushed
the
18.0-mig-sale_blanket_order
branch
from
9d587c8 to
b0e4c5a
Compare
Done! |
@IsabelAForgeFlow what about this comment? |
jbaudoux
left a comment
jbaudoux
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FYI, there have been a rewrite of this module in v16 and it is now in its own repo https://github.com/OCA/sale-blanket/tree/16.0
|
It looks that it means to replace this module and adding some improvements on it. Could you point out the most important differences? If a new module means to replace another I think it should provide a list of what is better from the existing solution. I will test sale_order_blanket_order myself but I would save a lot of time if you help me :) Thank you. |
|
Ok, I tested the sale-blanket module. You can deliver and invoice directly from the blanket order and also you can also do a call off order separately in order to deliver the blanket order partially. But basically both modules do the same. About the transition, even if the sale-blanket module version take over, there are going to be at least 2 Odoo versions 16.0 & 17.0 where the 2 modules will coexist in OCA, so why not keeping also both versions in v18? Then in v19 a transition plan has to be made. |
AaronHForgeFlow
force-pushed
the
18.0-mig-sale_blanket_order
branch
from
b0e4c5a to
c052609
Compare
|
It seems there is an agreement on keeping the 2 versions of the blanket orders, as discussed here: OCA/sale-blanket#6 Now I would rather like to keep this module in this current repo. Just to prevent confusion on the sale-blanket repo. The 2 modules have a very similar name. |
|
I superseded this PR to sale-blanket repo: OCA/sale-blanket#8 There was some discussion in here: OCA/sale-blanket#6 and I want to move forward so it is not big deal to me to continue in the other repo. |
|
This PR should be closed (as it was superseded by OCA/sale-blanket#8). |
20 participants
Migration to 18.0
Supersede: #3370