Currently partners have a boolean field to choose whether to receive
notifications only in their Odoo inbox or to receive them in their inbox
and by email. This leads to several issues :
* if a customer is configured to not receive emails he will not receive
any notification on sales orders, leads, ... This is not clearly
indicated to the salesman and it is not easy to know how to change
that behavior
* if an user chooses to receive emails and does not use its inbox a lot
of notifications stay in Odoo. The user has to manually set them as
done to make them disappear which is redundant.
This commit changes that behavior. From now on customers will always
receive all notifications by email. Indeed Odoo is not a customer oriented
mailbox. Moreover sales orders or discussions on leads send to customers
should always be sent by email as it is the standard communication
mechanism. Users will be able to choose to receive notifications in Odoo
or by email. The choice is no longer inbox or inbox + email, but inbox
or email. Choosing one option or the other one depends on the way the
user wants to work.
Technically the field is moved on the users model and selection keys
are renamed. Notification process is modified
* notified_partner_ids contains as before specified recipients as well
as followers matching the subtype
* customers and users working with emails are notified. During that
process customers notifications are marked as done to be able to
track the email state without having needaction. Users notifications
are currently deleted as we do not track their email state.
The removal of partner field implies changes in various addons that
define partner data with this field set in the values.
* event, website_event, website_forum,
* website_hr_recruitment, website_sale
Website access rights were buggy. The editor assets and website editor
assets have to be loaded together to work so the previous behavior
which only loaded one with the restricted access right was not right.
Also, people which had the "Manager" access right for model like event
or job only got access to creation and edition of those objects if they
had the full access to website access rights.
Now the website module creates the two same groups :
* group_website_publisher: load all editor assets, give access to
page creation for model the user has access (event, job, ...) and
edition of those pages
* group_website_designer: implies the first one and give access in
creation and edition of all pages + access of all website menus
The manager access rights for event, product, jobs, etc now implies
the group_website_publisher group for the user (so that the manager
have the editor assets and editor ui).
Note: some python codes use the group_website_publisher for no right
reason, this has to be adapted.
Several modules defines records with the external ID `base.foo_bar` while it is
created inside this module (typically menus and groups).
While there is no technical reasons to do so but this may introduce issues:
- these records will not be deleted during uninstall
- if a language is loaded before the installation of the module, it won't be
translated
The uninstallation will only remove the records with an external id linked to
this module (these would only be removed when removing base).
Installing a language before the module will drop the translations not linked
to an existing external id (as it can not be resolved).
This commit correct all the external ids tagged as from base or other incorrect
modules.
Before this commit when you edit a contact with the editor, you didn't see
the selected record before the save.
Now, you can edit a contact with the html editor.
We move the hacked field self (on res.partner) from website_partner to base.
2 bugs:
field and record was reversed in call
need to pass a browseRecord and not a dict, because we uses .env on it
This hack allow to use widget='contact' on the browse record
itself and not on a specific field from the browse record
Eg:
<div t-field="partner.self" t-options='{
"widget": "contact",
"fields": ["address", "phone"]
}'/>
Since saas-3, website controllers use `request.website.render`
to render the template of a web page. This was kept for retro
compatibility. It's time to stop using deprecated stuff.
Same for `_render` method on website.
'json' route don't use `request.render` since
`JsonRequest` has no `render` method.
Christophe Simonis