Have:
- Model A with a x2m to model B
- Object A with multiple objects B in x2m (that will be sorted)
- On the list view of model A, click on a column to sort by a field
- this field shall not exist in B
- open a record A (towards form view)
Before this commit, the sorting of the x2m crashed, because the key orderedBy was propagated
Due to commit e713ed2a69
After this commit, it doesn't crash
OPW 1913133
closesodoo/odoo#29094
Have a form record with a progress bar
Modify the max_value of the progress, as well as the current_value bar through an onchange
Before this commit, the new max_value was not taken into account
After this commit, it is.
closesodoo/odoo#29056
Define a x2m tree view with a default_sort including more than 1 field to order the list against
Before this commit, the second field was never used
After this commit, it is used
OPW 1909785
closesodoo/odoo#28840
Steps:
- open a modal form view from tree view first line and make a change
- open a modal from the second line and make a change
- open the second line back: the change were lost
In a given number of conditions (a many2one inside the form view, there
is a one2many in the form view not inside the tree view, ....) this
happened because:
- when we save the first line, we get onchange data for the second one
- this onchange data can't be applied before second line is loaded, but
it is saved so it can be applied if second line is ever opened
- when the second line is opened the saved change is applied => OK
- when the second line is opened a second time the saved change is
applied again, possibly overwriting posterious change => BAD
With this changeset, when the record with unapplied onchange is loaded
for the first time, the unapplied onchange is applied only once.
Added test without the change failed with:
- only 1 turtle for second partner (result: 0 not 1)
- second partner turtle is Michelangelo (result: "" not "Michelangelo")
opw-1846820
closes#28644
When a view is loaded, it checks which fields it has to load.
In the case of a many2one, it could be the case that a context key is present in
one view and not in the other; if it happens, we should reload the data, as a
name_get result could vary.
opw 1891295
closesodoo/odoo#28298
Before this commit, when loading the data and calling the prostprocess,
the viewType was not correctly passed which could lead to broken
behaviour. For example, if one was to load a record from a list view
embedded in a form view, the viewtype passed was the list which
prevented to load the data from the form view.
OPW 1891295
closesodoo/odoo#28279
In Firefox, the input behavior and visual representation (navigation, caret
placement, value selection, etc.) was broken when using a datepicker (easily
reproductible on date and datetime widgets).
This was due to the `focus` event being stopped on the input, which doesn't
seem to be correctly supported by Firefox.
The deleted code was supposed to toggle the picker when the field was clicked
(see odoo/odoo@89093a1) (toggle on click and disable focus) but the lib
correctly supports on focus without extra code.
This also fixes the fact that the datepicker was not open on focus (only on
clicked). In some tests where the field was the first in the form view, it is
now correctly autofocused.
Forward-port: not useful from 12.0 because the code has changed with BS4 and
this has already been applied in odoo/odoo@6692919 and odoo/odoo@c63630d.
Closes#23438closesodoo/odoo#27657
The datetimepicker option was introduced to be able to customize the
datetime picker widget in date/datetime fields. However, due to the way
the _makeDatePicker function was coded, it did not work in datetime
fields.
Thank to Yajo for the initial fix
closesodoo/odoo#27541
Hardening of commit:995610c065bf0242cb5023cfad2940234395739e
The JournalDashboardGraph requires nv, which is lazyloaded.
However it requires nvd3.js which is loaded after nv.d3.js.
A function called in destroy is defined by nv.d3.js,
which can make the crashhappen with the right (wrong) timing.
opw 1873749
Before this rev., there was a crash when a FieldDomain was reset
with a new domain (e.g. coming from an onchange). For instance, it
crashed in Email Marketing > create new Mass Mailing > select
mailing lists. Introduced by 68332a01.
opw-1882850
Suppose you select a customer for a sale order.
You type the beginning of his name "think", and a name_search is triggered
which finds matching results, with first result "Think Big Systems".
There are three ways to select it: click, enter or tab.
Now there can be a warning set on this customer
("Bad client, only accept cash", or "good client, offer discount").
In that case, clicking on tab would trigger the onchange displaying the warning,
but it would also set floating to true, which means a dialog to create client
"think" would appear.
This happens if the onchange is delayed, and thus the call to reset the floating
state is triggered only after the focusout completed, instead of before.
Coauthored with @aab-odoo
opw 1866619
opw 1874475
The domain was instantiated without being given any evaluation context.
As a result, the uid variable was not defined,
crashing the js if present in a user-defined filter.
opw 1866852
The value of the statinfo widget is rendered by the qweb after a t-esc.
Say if the python rounding returned 14.0000000001
(supposed to be a two digits precision number through the magic of floats)
then the statinfo widget would print it as-is.
We now format the value at assignation.
opw 1865426
Suppose there is a one2many field embedded in a one2many,
(say we are viewing record A with one2many field B itself with a one2many C).
Furthermore, there is a second page of the one2many field B.
If an onchange is applied on B, then the server replies with a 1 command for all
B records attached to the currently viewed object A.
This includes a list of commands [[5], [4, C_id]*] for each B record,
in particular B records that are on the second page.
Since they are on the second page, they might not have been fetched by the
frontend; in that case the corresponding C_ids are thus unknown.
As a consequence, on save the frontend sends a command 0 to create the records
for all unknown C_ids.
Since it doesn't have any value to give to the 0 command, the row creation
usually crash in the backend.
Another wrong behaviour is fixed at the same time: if the server sends an update
on the list of C ids with 4 commands.
In that case, if the record has not been prefetched, we have no way to know
if the list changed or not.
To solve this, when we receive the 4 commands by the server, we send back 4
commands.
coauthored by @aab-odoo
opw 1835936
Let's assume a one2many A inside a form view, such that the one2many
views (list, not editable, and form) are defined inline, and there is an
onchange on A. There is another inline one2many B editable list
displayed in the inner form view (and B isn't in the list). There are
two records on the one2many A, both of them having one record in their
one2many B. Edit the first record of A, and edit it's subrecord in B.
Click on save. This triggers an onchange on A and the onchange returns a
command 5 (DELETE_ALL), and two commands 1 (UPDATE). Now edit the second
record of A, and simply close the dialog (e.g. 'Discard'). Save the main
record: the record in one2many B of the second record of A has been duplicated.
This occured because the code in BasicModel messed up information coming
from the onchange (UPDATE command) and from the read (performed when
opening the second record), thus producing a CREATE command instead of
an UPDATE one.
This rev. ensures to properly mix the read data with the onchange
result, by transfering the changes over the list datapoint created after
the read.
opw-1836785
closes#25330
Revision on b09f0c99
The intent of the previous commit was to no drop records in a list
on discard in the following cases:
- when they have been created from a `default_get`
- when they have been created from an `onchange` that result
from a `default_get`
Before the commit above, the kind of records that were abandoned
in those cases are stated as invalid, which happens when a record
has a required field that is empty.
The case of an `onchange` that is not involved in a `default_get`
was not considered in the fixes above. In fact, this is the intent
behaviour in most cases. However, if the items in the list are
created from such an `onchange`, we should not drop them.
This commit fixes the bug where records in a list that are created
from an `onchange` are wrongly abandoned. Here is the new logic to
abandon a record on discard in a list:
- the record that is marked as "do not abandon" should not be
abandoned;
- a record that is registered as a "not new addition" in the
list should not be dropped;
- a record that is registered as a "new addition" in the list,
and has been updated afterwards, should not be dropped;
- a record that is not new should not be dropped;
opw-806650
Have a model A with a o2m to B.
In the list have a field B > m2o > C
Also have a sequence field (widget handle) on B
Then Create a record A
Arrange yourself to have two new records B popping right away (through an onchange)
in the o2m. Their C field have to be empty
Resequence those two B lines with the handle
Before this commit, there was a traceback when trying to do an name_get on the C fields
Since both of them are empty, there is no record in the localData
Hence, no model. And also no records anyway, so no need to do a name_get
After this commit, there is no traceback, the name_get is avoided when no data is to be fetched
OPW 1853088
closes#24988
Model A has a o2m to model B
Model B has a m2o parent_id on B
In A's form, add a B item,
then in the m2o, create record
Save and New
Click on the m2o
Before this commit, the python crashed on name_search.
This was because we sent the virtual ids to it
After this commit, there is no crash
OPW 1850212
closes#24948
Have a decorated (conditional on field) editable list, with a default_order.
Have more records than the pager allows.
Add an item, and hit escape to cancel addition.
Before this commit, the cancellation crashed because the first record on the other page
was trying to evaluate the decoration for its row, which is wrong in the first place.
This was because creating a record increases the limit of the list, to be able to see the record
being created.
At cancellation though, that limit was never decreased.
After this commit, the whole flow happens without problem.
OPW 1844495
closes#24682
Revision on https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/9a9da5763b38a3bce54e9c4870af0032e38cacc3
The intent of the commit above was to no abandon records in a list on
discard when these records have been created from a `default_get`.
Also, the `default_get` may also perform an `onchange` that could create
more records. The records from this `onchange` must also be included in
the "do not abandon" rule.
However, the rule was too relax, so that any following `onchanges` from
a user interaction was also considered into this rule. As a result, it was
not possible to abandon such records.
With this fix, we restrict the rule to `default_get` (already the case) and
only the `onchange` right after a `default_get`. Any record created on an
`onchange` from a user interaction after a `default_get` should be abandoned
on discard.
Representation of creating the list:
savepoint
|----------|-----------|-------||--------|------->
create default_get onchange1 onchange2
record in the list is created by default_get or onchange1
=> do not abandon on discard
record in the list is created by onchange2
=> abandon on discard
Before this commit, some records in a list did not show the name of their
many2one fields.
This case occurs when the records in the list are created from a default_get,
and the records do not fit in a single page. In that case, the records in the
first page correctly display the names of their many2one fields, but not the
records in the other pages.
Fixes#24547
Before this commit, when a list contains records with many2one fields that
contain the same values, duplicate ids were passed to the server on rpc
`name_get`.
For instance, if 40 records in a list refer to a Unit of Measure with id "1"
whose displayed_name is "unit(s)", the server receives a long list of ids with
simply the value "1". Also, the server responds with a list of displayed_name,
in this case a list of 40 strings "unit(s)".
With this commit, we always pass unique ids to the server on rpc `name_get`.
When sorting records according to a many2one field in a list view
embedded in a form view, the js would sort according to their ids,
in a seemingly arbitrary order.
Thus sorting records according to a field with values in ("a", "b", "c")
could be sorted as "a", "a", "c", "b" instead of "a", "a", "b", "c".
We make the comparison on the name of the field instead.
opw 1838860
Assume a one2many field inside a form, displaying field A in its
list view, and a field B in its (dialog) form view. Moreover, there
is an action button in the dialog, which updates the value of B.
Before this rev., B wasn't correctly reloaded when the button was
clicked, because the BasicModel reloaded the fields on the list
view (i.e. field A), whereas it should reload the fields in both
views.
This fix is twofold. First, we force the viewType to 'form' when
the record is reloaded, instead of the default ('list'), so that
fields in the form view are correctly reloaded. Second, when we
open the form view in the dialog, we add the fields of the list
view to the dict of fields of the form view, so that the form
is aware of those fields and can ask the model to reload them
(still without displaying them).
Fixes#24189
Have a One2Many
The views of that o2m define two inline views: the list and the form
in the list view, put a field that isn't in the form and used in a domain
Try to add an item to the list
The form pops up
Fill in the data and save & close
Before this commit:
It crashed when evaluating the domain on a field using the field that is not in the form
After this commit:
Subviews share their fields in a special object on the parent record
In our case, the form view checks in that shared resource if the fields it is supposed to initialize
are there.
Hence, this flow doesn't crash anymore
OPW 1837511
closes#24350
The initial rev. odoo/odoo@2d3ecf2 that was supposed to handle this use case
was in fact only dealing with one command as default value for nested x2m, not
more.
The basic model can now handle multiple commands.
Closes#24241
In the reference widget, the focus was always on the input (many2one) even
though the first select (with the model) was not set.
Thanks to @kaerdsar for the original PR.
Partially closes#24070
When Odoo display a phone number number, on phone or if VOIP is
installed a invisible `­` character was added from 9.0 up to
saas-11.2 so an applications such as skype would not be concerned with
the number.
But if someone copy-pasted from this to somewhere else in Odoo, we would
get incorrect number with this invisible caracter. So this change make a
special case for the "FieldPhone" so the character is removed from data
saved.
opw-1834858
closes#24223
Before this rev., a crash occured when a default_get returned a
command 0 (CREATE) for a one2many, with a value for a date(time)
field (e.g. [0, false, {some_date_field: '2018-12-08'}]). This
was because the related values (inside the commands) weren't
parsed. This only impacted date and datetime fields, for which the
parsing converts the string into a moment instance.
Fixes#23672
Have the create_date field displays on a one2many list
Try to add a record onto the list
Before this commit, when the virtual record is added onto the list
it crashes because the datetime field is undefined and cannot be parsed
After this commit, It doesn't crash though the value would have to wait the save on the main record
to be updated (because it is the create_date)
OPW 1834250
closes#24097
Consider the following scenario involving a one2many list (non
editable) inside a form view:
- click on 'Add an item', a model opens,
- fill the fields and click on 'Save & Close',
- reopen the freshly created record,
- maybe make some changes (this is optional, but makes sense),
- click on 'Save & New',
- fill the fields and click on 'Save & Close',
-> the second created record isn't added to the list.
The problem comes from the fact that when the dialog is opened for
the second time (in this case by clicking on a record), the 'save'
handler registers an 'UPDATE' command. While this is correct for
the 'Save & New' click (as we update an existing record), this
isn't for the second record which doesn't exist yet, and thus
requires an 'ADD' command.
This rev. ensures that the two cases are handled in the 'save'
handler given to the dialog.
OPW 1829723
Before this commit, when some records were created from an `onchange`,
we have the following weird behaviour:
Suppose that this record has some required fields that are empty.
When we click on this record, then somewhere else, the record
disappears from the list.
This is because the records contains invalid fields, and it is wrongfully
assuming that the record to be discarded comes from "Add an item".
A previous commit [1] fixed a bit this issue with `default_get`, but since
it relied on a fragile heuristic, we decide to apply the correct fix with
this commit.
[1] https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/b09f0c99be2b13d33986414485556d87da186d65
Before this commit, some breaking spaces were present in the js code.
Such spaces are misinterpreted and worked by luck.
This has become a problem with exported js bunldes (e.g. the
external_lib bundle in im_livechat).
This commit replaces breaking spaces by regular spaces.
Steps to reproduce the issue in 11.0 Enterprise:
- Go to the language English
- Remove from the time format the seconds
- Refresh the page
- Go to sales
- Create a sales order;
Bug:
- You get the warning message
closes#23596closes#22027
opw:1829577
Have a form view with a O2M.
The model at the 'many' end has a reference field
Have a record of the second model display in a modal
(by clicking on a record in the o2m list)
Before this commit:
The field reference was not filled up
This was because the fields to fetch on the modal creation weren't correctly set.
Obvisouly, it also created problem when trying to change the record on the modal:
spawning tracebacks because the reference field was not present in the local datas
After this commit:
The display of the reference field is as expected both in the original form and in the modal
OPW 1829822
closes#22468closes#23896
Have a list with readonly modifiers on at least one column.
Have the first record of the list be readonly as computed by the modifier
Create and edit a second record
Enter a value in the cell and hit TAB
Before this commit:
The focus on the targetted cell was lost and the rendering of the cell was in mode readonly
This was because the baseMode of the modifier dict was applied to one and only one node (== one column) and hence to *all* the records
After this commit:
The rendering and keyboard TAB navigation works as expected in the list editable
The baseMode concept has been sharpened and each cell now has one
OPW-1816569
OPW-1824979
closes#23809closes#22859closes#23436
* [FIX] web: Make accessible with keyboard the delete button on o2m fields
Currently, the delete button in one2many fields (trash icon) is not
reachable when using the keyboard, because it's neither a link, nor a
button or any other interactable HTML element, but a `<span>`.
This change causes that button to be an actual HTML button keeping the
same appearance, so it may be reached when using the keyboard.
* [FIX] web: Modify test to expect button instead of span as o2m trash icon
Since buttons to delete records in o2m fields (the trash icon) were
changed from `<span>` to `<button>` to be able to access them with the
keyboard, the test need to be modified so it expect the new element
type and doesn't break.
Have a model with a m2m (field A)
this m2m has also a m2m (and displayed as m2m tags in the view) (field AA)
Have a domain on field A, to trigger the search view selection
Click on add an item
Select everything in the modal, making sure that there is more than 40 records
Click on Select
Before this commit:
There was a traceback indicating the local data did not contain records >= 40
This was because the internal data repository was constrained by a limit
After this commit:
We adapt the limit of the local data repository and there is not traceback
OPW 1823400
When we discard an element, we want to make sure that the new state is
not corrupted by previous user operations. In our case, we possibly had
a limit and an offset values modified by the user.
This could lead to unpleasant situations, with incorrect data displayed
on the form view.
Note that this actually fixes a new bug introduced by commit
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/e7fab234201e357da52c3576ad2e8fc9ceee9359
(this is the commit that introduces the tempLimitIncrement attribute)
The issue here is quite simple. If we are editing a multipage one2many
field, then we click on the pager, we need to properly unselect the
current row.
If we do not do that, then we can enter invalid data. For example,
assume that there is a readonly field. We click on add, it creates a
(virtual) record with no value for that field. When we click on the
pager, we select the next page, and bypass all validation.
When we are in the process of adding a record, we do not want to update
the pager count. The reason is that if the user is at the limit (so,
1-40/40, no pager visible), then click on add, there will be a pager
shown with 1-40/41. Now, imagine that the record currently being added
as a required field, and the user clicks on the pager. In that case, we
need to discard the newly added record (bringing the total back to 40),
then move to next page, which does not exist anymore.
So, to fix this issue, we simply consider that a record being added
does not count, from the point of view of the pager.
A big problem with the o2m edition happens when the user has a full page
(so, in general, 40 records) and click on add.
If the o2m is in editable="bottom" mode (which is actually a really
common usecase), then the next record will be added at the end.
However, since we have a limit of 40, it will immediately go to the next
page.
The effect is even weirder when there is a required field in the tree
view. In that case, the new record appears correctly, the user can edit
it, then, as soon as the required fields are set, it will immediately
disappear from the current screen.
In this commit, we have a really simple solution: we simply increase the
limit in this case. An interesting thing is that it is actually temporary:
when the user goes to the next page, the limit is back to its original
value (due to the pager click: it resets the value to what the pager knows).
Lucas Perais (lpe)