This commit adapts the BasicModel to combine calls to `default_get` and
(first) `onchange`. When creating a new record, we now only call
`onchange`, which thus return default values and potential onchange
values.
Tests (and the MockServer) have been adapted accordingly.
NOTE 1. If the `default_get` within the `onchange` returns a value for
a field that is not in the view, we ignore it, and it won't be saved.
Before, that value was kept and sent upon save. This change in behavior
may prove problematic, although the overall risk is small. Decision has
been made to keep heavy comments and code snippets if we were to revert
back somehow to the previous situation.
NOTE 2. Putting a context on a many2one field may change the value
returned by `name_get` for that field. By default, the calls to
`name_get` are done by `onchange`. If the context on a field must be
used for `name_get`, one has to set the option `always_reload` to `True`
on the field. In that case, every `onchange` that changes the value
will trigger an extra `name_get`.
NOTE 3. Suppose that a one2many field has a list view with field A, and
a form view without field A. When adding a line, we now send all known
fields (main view and inline views) to the `onchange`, which may return
a default value for A. The value will appear on the list view, but not
in the form view. The former behavior was to call `default_get` with
the fields that occur in the form view only, and therefore field A would
be left to value `False`.
NOTE 4. A test surprisingly adds an extra call to `read`. The test was
actually wrong before. With the changes in MockServer, we now correctly
receive a command `[6, false, [1]]`, whereas before we received `[1]`,
which isn't a valid command, and which was ignored. As a consequence,
an extra `read` is done, whereas the test asserts it shouldn't. But it
already didn't work before (I checked by sending the correct command).
This needs to be bugfixed elsewhere (task-id-2323491): in a o2m with a
onchange and default order records on an other page than the first
should not trigger a `read`.
Task 2261084
Co-authored-by: Raphael Collet <rco@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Aaron Bohy <aab@odoo.com>
Improve mock server:
- add support for mocked `fetch`
- add support for `active_test`
- add support for x2m `in` in domains
- add support for default values computed from a function
- implement a more natural "next id" compute
- allow initial data without ids
- ensure write and x2m commands integrity
- improve bad data/bad commands error messages
- always warn for failing RPC, not only in debug mode
- fix all existing tests that had inconsistency data
Other changes done in mail (or dependents) that are not just related to tests:
- remove `direct_partner` from formatter result
->`correspondent` can be computed from other keys, especially `members`
- fix `livechat_visitor` convertData
-> only process if there is value
- add `current_partner` and `current_user_id` as `init_messaging` result
-> easier to mock than session
- remove usage of `need_moderation`
-> that was just a search indirection to `moderation_status`
- adapt `partner_id` -> `res_partner_id` key in `_notification_format`
-> to be consistent with field name
- add name in result of `mail_partner_format`
-> sometimes display_name is not the same
- remove usage of `is_moderator`
-> that was just an indirection to `moderation_channel_ids`
Enterprise counterpart: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/11523
task-2287171
closesodoo/odoo#55854
X-original-commit: 7ba3fecb3377a720d1eb70e7515a0c45da73836d
Related: odoo/enterprise#12391
Signed-off-by: Sébastien Theys (seb) <seb@odoo.com>
There are orm models that don't have _rec_name defined. The orm doesn't
allow creation of record via name_create if _rec_name is not defined in
the model. This commit considers this fact, such that if name_create
returns false, we don't proceed on displaying the non-existing record.
Note: _rec_name defaults to 'name' if not specified so only few models
don't have _rec_name.
closesodoo/odoo#54270
Task-id: 2285036
X-original-commit: 676c2b8e4fdf7347d44bc5afb7ca51d39338a527
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Since commit 042b4060bd, attrs 'column_invisible' on button was
ignored. This commit makes this work alongside the adjacent button
grouping feature: if all adjacent buttons have their attrs
column_invisible evaluated to true, no column is rendered for this
group of adjacent buttons.
closesodoo/odoo#53489
X-original-commit: 3110e34ab8e5ec3bf7160655af21f72b4d2179db
Signed-off-by: Julien Mougenot (jum) <jum@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
This commit adapts tests following recent changes on the helpers.
The main change is that addMockEnvironment (and all functions using
it) are now async, as they need to wait for services to be started.
Generally, Users are not necessarily aware that they can quick create a most
records by simply typing in their name+enter in the many2xxx field input.
The exact purpose of this commit is to make sure the user discovers the quick
create feature of our many2xxx fields.
For that, when the input is empty, display 'Start typing to create a record...'
at the bottom of the dropdown when can_create is set and no_create_edit option
not set. So the user can easily understand that by typing and pressing enter
will create the new record.
Also "Search and Create" options in the dropdown only been shown to the user
when it type anything in the input box as the same case in the "Create" option.
Task : 2266557
Co-authored-by: Mohammed Shekha <msh@openerp.com>
Co-authored-by: Julien Mougenot <jum@odoo.com>
When a resequencing is done inside an object hierarchy of two
controllers, since 9b90d8727d we would call resquencing code one time
per controller.
So if for example we are in a list view inside a form view (eg. a
"Search More" modal in a form view) the resequencing would work for the
list view, but then cause traceback when it is handled by form view.
With this changeset, the first controller that get the event
`resequence_records` even gobbles it up.
Without change, added test fails because of original traceback:
Cannot read property 'res_id' of undefined@ 202 ms
Source:
TypeError: Cannot read property 'res_id' of undefined
at /web/static/src/js/views/basic/basic_controller.js:744:67
...
opw-2256818
closes#51827closesodoo/odoo#52018
X-original-commit: eef4b99fdb9469c040af80d055933eda367b7b3d
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Lempereur (nle) <nle@odoo.com>
Write something in a many2one field, and click on 'Create "..."'
to quick create a record with the given value (name_create). When
the name_create fails (e.g. because there are mandatory fields in
the model), we open a form view.
Before this commit, when this happened for many2one fields inside
x2many editable lists, it crashed, since [1].
[1] 50bf8309f8closesodoo/odoo#50948
X-original-commit: 43c513306094444ff25ad98584b426ddb8a3b525
Signed-off-by: Julien Mougenot (jum) <jum@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
This commit improves the dialog that opens when a user clicks out
of an 'un-commited' many2one. It is no longer possible to edit
the value, and the sentence has been reworded.
closesodoo/odoo#49528
Task: 2234212
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
In readonly, this widget displays the image of the related record
next to its display_name. In edit, it behaves exactly like the
regular many2one.
Part of task 2195254
before this commit: from commit: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/d58d6e270f4106d717821438490f60bc4f71306e parent context
was propagated to sub views, propagating whole context to sub view creates
issue as it contains default_* key inside it, there is a chance that sub view
has same field name which matches with default_fieldName in context,
e.g. go to sale order form view and create sale order line, while selecting
product, write in product_id field so that Create and Edit option comes,
select Create and Edit option, so whatever previously written in product_id
field will be added in product.product form's context as default_name,
now go to Purchase tab of product form and try to create Supplier, but note
that Vendors One2many should be editable, if it is not then to produce this
issue, make Vendor o2m list editable top/bottom, as soon as you click on
Vendor o2m's create button traceback generated which comes from name_get of
res.partner, issue raised because vendor o2m has m2o of res.partner and field
name is 'name', when default_get for vendor o2m is called it will propagate context
and context has default_name='typed string in product_id', as name field is
m2o with res.partner it will generate traceback as m2o accepts (id, name) tuple
not string
after this commit: propagate context to sub view but remove default_* keys
from parent context
task-2121161
closesodoo/odoo#49075
X-original-commit: 2e3756e0ce96a9e0c5fa304632a2600cbd832ef5
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Let's assume a form view with an x2many list, containing itself
an x2many field (no widget, so simply displaying the number of
records). When a record of the list is clicked, a form view
opens and displays the same sub x2many field, with widget
many2many_tags. Both list and form views of the x2many aren't
inline (thus have to be fetched on demand).
Before this commit, it crashed when the user clicked on a row
of the x2many list.
The bug has been introduced by a9cebd5a, which wrongly removed the
code handling this specific situation. At least, now we have a
test attesting that this code isn't useless.
Note that the diff isn't as scary as it looks like (we just added
an if/else, and thus indented the former code inside the else
clause).
closesodoo/odoo#48116
Signed-off-by: Géry Debongnie (ged) <ged@openerp.com>
Use of the new control panel helpers to increase consistency and change the assertions
according to the new DOM/behaviour (e.g. components removed instead of turning invisible).
Part of task 2196029
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Duckerts-Antoine <dam@odoo.com>
The FieldMany2One allows to quick create record (name_create).
However, sometimes, required fields on the co-model make the
name_create crash. In this case, the FieldMany2one opens a form
view in a dialog to let the user specify those fields, and create
a new record with the 'create' method. This was working fine.
The FieldMany2ManyTags embeds a FieldMany2One to let the user
search for and select or (quick) create tags. In this case, failing
quick creation didn't fallback on the dialog form view, but
displayed a server error instead. This commit fixes this issue.
Bug introduced by 50bf8309f8
Task 2192754
closesodoo/odoo#47183
X-original-commit: 63ab065f3298c13bb19ae1245d7fd2652581b254
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Let's assume a form view with a boolean field and a one2many field,
displayed for instance with widget many2many_tags. There is an
onchange on the boolean field, which populates the one2many, e.g.
[[5], [0, 0, {display_name: 'name', other_field: 'value'}]]
Before this commit, only the display_name was sent to the server on
save, because 'other_field' is unknown by the webclient.
Similar situations occurred with one2manys displayed as lists, and
onchanges returning values for fields that aren't in the list.
These situations probably didn't exist in Odoo yet, but a pending
task on website event adds one.
This commit ensures that all values returned by the onchange for
the x2many subrecords are sent back to the server when the user
saves.
closesodoo/odoo#46807
Signed-off-by: Géry Debongnie (ged) <ged@openerp.com>
This commit fixes two issues that occurred in the following
situation: in a form view, have a one2many field F1 displayed as a
list, that contains another one2many field F2, displayed with
widget many2many_tags (in the list), and with a list in the form
(in the dialog). In the dialog, the list of F2 displays a
field, say 'name', which has an onchange that sets 'display_name'.
Moreover, there is an onchange in the (main) form view, that
populates F1 and F2, for instance, it returns something like: {
F1: [[5], [0, 0, {
F2: [[5], [0, 0, {
display_name: 'xxx',
name: 'xxx',
}]]
}]]
}
1) If the user opens a related record in F1, and adds (in the
dialog) a related record in F2, then validates the dialog, the
newly created record in F2 isn't correctly displayed in the
many2many_tags (the display_name is `false`), i.e. the onchange
hasn't been applied.
2) If field 'name' in F2 in the list is required, the new record
can't be saved, even if the user enters a correct value.
In both cases, the reason is that we use the incorrect viewType in
datapoints: as we don't specify that we specifically want 'list',
the 'default' one is taken, and we thus use the fieldsInfo of the
many2many_tags, which only knows field 'display_name'. As a
consequence, onchanges aren't correctly applied (issue 1), and
fields aren't correctly reset (issue 2).
Issue reported on task 2189529
When x2many fields are displayed with widgets like many2many_tags,
there is no limit on the number of related records to fetch and
display. In this case, the 'limit' attribute on the datapoints is
undefined. This could lead to weird issues when the limit is used
in computation, e.g.
var index = list.offset + list.limit; // = NaN
There are several occurrences of the above examples in the code,
which can be observed in specific scenarios, e.g. the one encoded
in the test. In this scenario, when the bug occurs, new records
added to editable list views are inserted on top (even if the list
is editable="bottom"), but the edited row is the last one.
Issue reported on task 2189529
Let's assume the following scenario in a form view:
- have a one2many field, say fieldA, displayed as a list,
containing another one2many, fieldB, (no widget, thus
displaying 'n record(s)')
- the one2many list is not editable, so there is a sub form view,
displaying fieldB as a list, and in this list some random field,
say fieldC, is displayed
- have a random field on the main form view, with an onchange to
populate the one2many
- set that random field s.t. the onchange returns something like
fieldA: [[5], [0, 0, {fieldB: [[0, 0, {fieldC: 'value'}]]}]]
- there is now a record in fieldA's list, displaying '1 record'
as value for fieldB
- click on that record to open it in a form view (dialog)
- in the dialog, in fieldB's list, we expect to have a single row
displaying 'value' as value for fieldC
Before this rev., it crashed when opening the record in the dialog,
whether the form view was inline or not.
The crash occured because fieldB was already in the list view, so
datapoints already existed for it (a list datapoint, and record
datapoints for records in the relation, in our example one record
datapoint). However, those datapoints didn't have the fieldsInfo of
the form view. When opening the form view, we added the fieldsInfo
of the form to the datapoint of the record we opened, but we didn't
recursively apply the fieldsInfo to its children. As a consequence,
when rendering the list view for fieldB in the dialog, we haven't
the information about fieldC, and it crashed.
Note that if fieldB wasn't present in fieldA's list view, it worked
fine because datapoints didn't exist before we opened the record in
the dialog.
Task 2120235
This commit trims leading and trailing spaces in search terms of
many2one.
task-2187414
closesodoo/odoo#45282
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Before this commit, there was a discrepancy between
many2many_tags widget and regular many2many list
That is, in tag mode, when someone had read access alone on the comodel
he could modify the members of the m2m relation on the current model
Which couldn't be done in m2m list
After this commit, it is possible in a m2m list to add
records to a relation, even if we don't have CRUD access on the comodel
Task 44074
closesodoo/odoo#40194
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
After this commit, x2many fields can have options like
create/delete which accept a domain, to make create/delete on
x2many conditional, say for example x2many field can have options
like:
options="{'create:' [('foo', '=', True)]', 'delete:' [('foo', '=', True)]'}"
With this when foo field is True, Create and Delete actions will
be available, but if foo is False then they won't.
In case of one2many fields, if 'create' is false, then 'Add a line'
(list) or 'Add' button (kanban) won't be displayed.
In case of many2many fields, 'Add a line' or 'Add' button will
always be displayed even if 'create' condition is false as it
doesn't really create records (but rather links existing ones).
Same applies for delete.
Task-2092953
closesodoo/odoo#42919
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Parth Chokshi <pch@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Aaron Bohy<aab@odoo.com>
*sale,sale_product_configurator
Let's assume a form view containing a many2one with an onchange
that updates the value of a one2many. Do a quick create in the
many2one. While the name_create request is pending, add a row to
the one2many but do not leave it. When the name_create returns, and
the onchange has been performed, the one2many is reset, and the row
is no longer in edition (worse, it could be invalid, i.e. in a state
that the user could not have reached in a normal situation).
This commit fixes this issue by considering the whole [name_create +
onchange] operation as one. This operation is executed in the mutex
of the model, so the other request (adding a row to the one2many) is
delayed until the many2one value has been correctly set.
This fixes an issue with the sale and rental tours (on sale_order),
that had been deactivated for a while.
In this commit:
- transformed test_utils helpers to always trigger native events
- introduced new test_utils_create helper: prepareTarget
- updated qunit asserts to support Owl Components
- updated all misused helpers that would crash with the updated test_utils
Co-authored-by: Julien Mougenot <jum@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Mathieu Duckerts-Antoine <dam@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Pierre Rousseau <pro@odoo.com>
This is a weird situation, but the python handles it. Let's assume
a many2one field F1 on model M1 with comodel M2, and on M2 the name
field (which is the _rec_name) being itself a many2one, and the
following scenario:
- create a new record for M1
- for field F1, select 'Create and Edit': it opens a form view for
M2 in a dialog
- type something in F2 input, and click 'Quick create'
- save the dialog
Before this rev., the value of F1 was [object Object]. Now, the new
value is properly displayed.
OPW 2091106
closesodoo/odoo#40549
X-original-commit: 5a04ea848abf50b1fb1f9893d1fcd98013bc025d
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Changes the behaviour of many2ones when their value is changed via a form dialog.
Before this commit, when editing a m2o with a form dialog opened by an external button,
the field triggered an onchange with its old value before reloading its widget.
This caused the edition in list views to display outdated information when
saving multiple records.
Now, the reload is executed first, then the onchange occurs so that the value is
the newly updated one.
Part of task 2078807
closesodoo/odoo#37576
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
only activate multi-edit on list with specific attribute.
When the attribute multi_edit="1" is set on the tree view the user
can select a/some records and it will activate the multi-edit
with confirmation dialog (even for a single record).
Also, on-change are not applied when using multi-edit
closesodoo/odoo#37525
Signed-off-by: VincentSchippefilt <VincentSchippefilt@users.noreply.github.com>
ClassNames 'oe_read_only' (resp. 'oe_edit_only') can be used in
x2many lists to hide columns in 'edit' (resp. 'readonly') modes.
However, before this rev., there were two issues:
1) Having such a className on a <button> tag didn't work well as
the 'display: none' rule didn't apply on the body cell (it only
applied on the button). Same could be observed on <widget>
nodes.
2) Having more than one invisible column (with those classNames)
didn't work either, because the footer cells weren't hidden.
We didn't notice it with one invisible column, because the
footer contained one cell less than the header and the body.
Those two issues could be observed on the mrp.bom form view.
Task 2068261
PURPOSE
Previously when the 'SAVE & NEW' button was pressed in the 'create and
edit...' menu of the many2many_tags widget was pressed, the modal window
would close and the button would act exactly like the 'SAVE & CLOSE'
button. This was due to the fact that whenever a new record was created
and added to the field, it would reset the many2one field it uses for
display, which would destroy the edit modal.
This commit fixes that by not notifying the underlying many2one field of
any change until the modal is closed by the user. This has the
disadvantage that tags display, if visible behind the modal 'shade',
will not be updated until the modal is closed, but restores the
functionality of the save&new button. It also adds a test for this
behaviour
task-2070454
closesodoo/odoo#37114
Signed-off-by: Aaron Bohy (aab) <aab@odoo.com>
Gives time to the user to enter an actual value in m2o in list views.
Before this commit, emptying a many2one field (selecting all > BACKSPACE or DELETE)
triggered instantly a field_change. This was an issue in multi edition as a field
changed triggered instantly a save on selected records without giving time to the
user to enter a new value.
Now, many2ones only trigger a fieldChange when selecting a new valid value.
Task 2068280
The tests in the file `relational_fields_mobile_tests.js` - which is
part of the mobile test suite - are actually not specific to mobile.
This commit merges those tests asserts into the tests already present in
the regular test suite. It ensures that all the existing asserts remains
and the actual coverage stays the same.
*: mail,partner_autocomplete: adapted tests
Added a new function to trigger the adequate type of event on
an element (native JS event to DOM Nodes and jQuery event to jQuery objects),
and refactored the generic event-triggering functions to call this new function.
Let's assume the following situation:
- an empty editable x2many list with date field (or any other
fixed width field) and optional fields
- add a record to the list, but discard it directly
- toggle an optional field
After those steps, the date field doesn't have its hardcoded,
absolute width anymore.
This rev. fixes this issue by clarifying the way the stored widths
are erased when the columns change, preventing to reach a corner
case in which we have stored widths, but we can't apply them, and
thus let the browser uniformly divide the space amongst columns.
When there were records in the list (and the browser computed the
optimal column widths according to them), and the user removes
them, we want to keep the widths as they are instead of forcing
them according to the field's types.
Mainly, when adding the first record to the list, as this is when
we switch from forcing the column's widths (when there is no data),
to letting the browser optimally divide the available space.
Some other cases had to be handled, like the multi edition.
Before this commit, a simple optimization was done: if a field was
modified in such a way that the new value is the same as the initial
value, then it is not considered changed.
However, with the new changes in the ORM, it may be an issue, because
doing so loses the intent of the user. If an onchange changes a field,
then the user changes it back, the server is not aware of that fact.
With this commit, we simply keep the field in the list of changes to
send to the server.
opw #2057230closesodoo/odoo#35890
Signed-off-by: Raphael Collet (rco) <rco@openerp.com>
Purpose
=======
Fields `customer` and `supplier` on `res.partner`
are mostly used in domains of many2x fields.
Those domains can confuse end users because they don't
see the partner they are looking for; and it's not obvious why.
Some identified problems:
1. It can lead to duplicated partners: the user does not find
the partner, so he creates a new one.
2. The user imports supplier contacts in the Contacts app, so they
don't get the `supplier` flag. Then the user wants to make a purchase order,
and cannot find the new suppliers in the list
3. A user removes the customer flag on a prospect, because they don't think
it's a customer yet - except now they can't make a quote for that customer...
Specification
=============
Remove the two mentioned fields.
Since fields `customer` and `supplier` have been removed, all partners
are now shown in many2one dropdowns.
But in some cases, not all partners are relevant or some are more likely
to be relevant than others. e.g. when creating a PO, top suppliers have a
higher priority than other partners.
So, adapt the places where those fields were used with the new mechanism to
display the searched the partners, according to the number purchase/sales
orders they made.
TaskID: 2031147
Co-authored-by: Yannick Tivisse <yti@odoo.com>
Let's assume a one2many field (editable list) in a form view with
a many2many (e.g. many2many_tags), and an onchange on the one2many
such that, when a row is added to the relation, the server returns
update commands for (a subset of) the records being already in the
relation. For thoses updated records, the many2many field needs to
be read (the onchange only returns the ids in the relation).
Before this rev., the many2many field was read independently for
each record in the one2many. This could cause a performance issue
on large relations. For instance, this was the case on
account.invoice records with a lot of lines.
Issue 2027356
closesodoo/odoo#34785
Signed-off-by: Géry Debongnie (ged) <ged@openerp.com>
Scenario:
We have the following models:
class A:
submodel_1_ids = fields.One2Many(B)
submodel_2_ids = fields.One2Many(B)
class B:
parent_model = fields.many2one(A)
name = fields.Char()
and the following onchange on class A:
api.onchange(submodel_1_ids)
def onchange_submodel1(self):
// add newline to second o2m
submodel_2_ids = submodel_1_ids
api.onchange(submodel_2_ids)
def onchange_submodel2(self):
do_smth
In a form view containing both o2m fields (editable="bottom" lists):
1) add a line on first o2m -> the onchange adds the same line on
the other o2m
2) add a line on the second o2m
Before this rev., the line (added in (2)) wasn't added at the bottom
of the list, and the row in edition wasn't the newly created one.
The issue occurred because we couldn't retrieve the datapoint
corresponding to the other line (the one created by the onchange on
the first o2m), and we thus created another which was put at the
end of the list. Then, the BasicModel messed up the sort of the
records because it couldn't match the virtual id of that new record
with the ones in orderedResIds.
We fixed the issue by preventing the model from creating a new
datapoint after the onchange, by using 'ref' instead of 'res_id' to
retrieve the one that already exist.
closesodoo/odoo#34493
Signed-off-by: VincentSchippefilt <VincentSchippefilt@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Aaron Bohy <aab@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: David Monjoie <dmo@odoo.com>
Let's assume a one2many field in a form view with a default value
with commands 4 (link to). Before this rev., when saving the record,
the BasicModel generated a command 4 and a command 1 (update) for
each record, with the values of the record (directly coming from DB).
This can cause an issue when the related record can't be edited
(e.g. a posted journal entry in accounting).
closesodoo/odoo#33797
Signed-off-by: Quentin De Paoli (qdp) <qdp@openerp.com>
This commit merges the following models
* account.invoice and account.move
* account.invoice.line and account.move.line
* account.voucher and account.move
* account.voucher.line and account.move.line
It was the opportunity for a big cleanup of the code, so it also restructures the whole account module, its different models/fields, the tests etc. for a better world and a better code readability.
==== Rationale ====
The rationale of this huge change is that we want journal entries / invoices to be easily edited, and changes reflected in the other model. It's a HUGE feature and very strategic for the fiduciary companies. For example, changing the account of a journal entry needs to be automatically reflected on the related invoice.
The same reasoning applies to sale/purchase vouchers.
==== Changes made in features =====
When creating an invoice, you are now creating a journal entry directly.
--> The object account.invoice no longer exists.
In the same fashion when creating an invoice line, you're now adding journal items directly in the journal entry representing the invoice. If this invoice line has some tax, it may create additional journal items as well.
--> The models account.invoice.line & account.invoice.tax no longer exist
Identically, when creating a sale/purchase receipt with its lines, you are now creating a journal entry directly and there's no more usability difference between encoding a receipt or an invoice.
--> The object account.voucher no longer exists.
--> The object account.voucher.line no longer exists.
--> The whole account_voucher module no longer exists.
Positive side-effects coming from these changes are
* draft invoices/bills/sale or purchase receipts now create a draft accounting entry. Validate these objects now simply post its journal entry. That means that draft invoices/bills/sale or purchase receipt can straightforwardly be included in reporting or budgets.
* opening a journal entry in form view will now always open the correct view: if it's a sale/purchase journal entry we will have a customer invoice/vendor bill view or a sale/purchase receipt view, whatever the menu we're coming from.
* code & business logic simplification. It is also condensed in a single place instead of being partially duplicated on invoices, vouchers and journal entries.
There should be no feature loss, except the one allowing to group multiple journal items together based on the same product during the invoice validation.
==== Changes made in models =====
* account.invoice: model removed. Instead, now use account.move with following mapping
field (account.invoice) field (account.move)
----------------------- --------------------
name invoice_payment_ref
number name
reference ref
comment narration
user_id invoice_user_id
amount_ total_company_signed amount_total_signed
residual amount_residual
state state + invoice_payment_state /!\ selection changed
date_invoice invoice_date
date_due invoice_date_due
sent invoice_sent
origin invoice_origin
payment_term_id invoice_payment_term_id
partner_bank_id invoice_partner_bank_id
incoterm_id invoice_incoterm_id
vendor_bill_id invoice_vendor_bill_id
source_email invoice_source_email
vendor_display_name invoice_vendor_display_name
invoice_icon invoice_vendor_icon
cash_rounding_id invoice_cash_rounding_id
sequence_number_next invoice_sequence_number_next
sequence_number_next_prefix invoice_sequence_number_next_prefix
'invoices' subset of account.move can be accessed by using the selection field 'type' or one of the many helpers like is_invoice()
* account.move: now has a valid state 'cancel' that has to be excluded from all business logic
* account.move: field 'amount' renamed into 'amount_total'
* account.move: field 'reverse_entry_id' renamed into 'reversed_entry_id'
* account.move.line: now has a field 'display_type' that has to be excluded from all business logic, in order to support invoice layouting
* account.invoice.line: model removed. Instead, now use account.move.line with following mapping
field (account.invoice.line) field (account.move.line)
---------------------------- -------------------------
invoice_id move_id
uom_id product_uom_id
invoice_line_tax_ids tax_ids
account_analytic_id analytic_account_id
'invoice lines' subset of all account.move.line from a journal entry can be accessed by using the boolean field 'exclude_from_invoice_tab'
* account.invoice.tax: model removed. Instead, now use account.move.line with following mapping
field (account.invoice.tax) field (account.move.line)
--------------------------- -------------------------
invoice_id move_id
account_analytic_id analytic_account_id
amount price_unit
base tax_base_amount
'tax lines' subset of all account.move.line from a journal entry can be accessed by using the relational field 'tax_line_id'
* account.invoice.confirm: model removed. Instead, now use the 'post()' function of account.move
* account.invoice.refund: model removed. Instead, now use account.move.reversal to reverse the entries with the same options as we had for invoices
* account.voucher: model removed. Instead, now use account.move of type in ['out_receipt', 'in_receipt]
* account.voucher.line: model removed. Instead, now use account.move.line
==== Changes made in functions ====
* on account.move, method _run_post_draft_to_post() renamed into _autopost_draft_entries()
* on account.move, method action_account_invoice_payment() renamed into action_invoice_register_payment()
* on account.move, method action_invoice_reconcile_to_check() renamed into action_open_matching_suspense_moves()
* on account.move, method _get_domain_edition_mode_available() renamed into _get_domain_matching_supsense_moves()
* on account.move, method _get_intrastat_country_id() renamed into _get_invoice_intrastat_country_id()
* on account.move.line, method _get_domain_for_edition_mode() renamed into _get_suspense_moves_domain()
* in account.bank.statement, contextual key 'edition_mode' renamed into 'suspense_moves_mode'
Was task 1917430
Martin Trigaux