Commit dc1681b1 did change the name of the inventory creation from
direct qty update, but test still tries to compare the product.name
closesodoo/odoo#25948
In 11.0 7e724f96c5 is_product_variant has been introduced back (it was
removed in 10.0 b747b05fa). But related of _inherits are computed on the
related model so is_product_variant would always be false.
Without fix, added test fails with:
AssertionError:
Items in the first set but not the second: True, Items in the second
set but not the first: False, Product variants are variants
fixes#26961
related to opw-1814973
closes#27163
- Create a product named 'toto'
- Perform a call to `name_search`:
`self.env['product.product'].name_search('pouet', [], 'not ilike')`
Product 'toto' doesn't show up in the result list.
The domain should take into account that `default_code` can be `False`.
Note: the bug also occurs if the product is called 'trululu'.
opw-1837957
- Create a product named 'toto'
- Perform a call to `name_search`:
`self.env['product.product'].name_search('pouet', [], 'not ilike')`
Product 'toto' doesn't show up in the result list.
The domain should take into account that `default_code` can be `False`.
Note: the bug also occurs if the product is called 'trululu'.
opw-1837957
In 5c2380e9f an issue when modifying variants values was solved when an
attribute on the product variant had "create_variant" unset.
This commit forward-port what was lost of it in 11.0, that part was
probably lost because the code was previously changed when adapting to
python3.
Without the change, the added test failed creating a new variant keeping
the existing one. With this change, 'nocreate' value are ignored when
computing new variants to create.
opw-1815226
closes#23332
A name_search on attribute line would possibly ends up with a domain like:
['|', ('attribute_id', '=', 'm'), ('value_ids', '=', 'm'),
('attribute_id', '=', 'm')]
which would just search the attribute.
This is caused by calling the default name_search. This commit forgo
the default name_search when we are in this attribute line special case.
courtesy-of: @fmdl
opw-813505
closes#22619closes#22760
PURPOSE
=======
It's confusing as it's not used. We had a customer with two exact same rules; he complained to the
support today because Odoo decided to use the other rule. (he was confused because he thought
priorities were based on sequences as there is a sequence field that allow drag & drop)
Order is based on "applied_on, min_quantity desc, categ_id desc", not on sequences. (since v9
and it's better that way; but we forgot to remove the sequence field)
SPECIFICATION
=============
Remove field
A new API is introduced for price computing using pricelists. It is simplier
to use in most use cases, which is computing the product price in a given
pricelist. Old methods return dictionnaries and tuples, which are rarely
used in the code.
product_uom._compute_quantity is an ensure one multi method taking a browse
record as second paramter. It replaces _compute_qty and _compute_qty_obj
to have a single and standard computation method.
product_uom._compute_price() is now an ensure_one multi methods, taking
a browse record as second unit. This helps simplifying and unifying the
various calls and price computation methods.
Old price_get method is now replaced by price_compute and ready for migration.
Explicit parameters for unit of measure and currency have been added to ease
code understanding.
Including
- unit tests for test/inventory.yml
- unit tests for test/move.yml
- unit tests for test/shipment.yml
- integration of test_reuspply.py
- integration of test_owner_available into test_product.py
New tests are temporarily deactivated. Indeed they rely on onchange methods
that will change during migration. Tests will be reactivated after migration
and updated.
Remaining products :
- product_product_0 becomes service_order_01
- product_product_1b becomes service_cost_01
- product_product_43 becomes product_order_01
- product_product_47 becomes product_delivery_01
- prodcut_product becomes product_delivery_02
- Replace product_product_56 by service_delivery
- Replace product_product_59 by consu_delivery_01
- Replace product_product_58 by consu_delivery_02
- Replace product_product_57 by consu_delivery_03
Removed products :
- product_product_53, product_product_57, product_product_55, product_product_54, product_product_52,
product_product_51, product_product_50, product_product_48, product_product_46, product_product_32,
product_product_33, product_product_28, product_product_38, product_product_39, product_product_40,
product_product_41, product_product_34, product_product_29, product_product_30, product_product_44,
product_product_31, product_product_35, product_product_36, product_product_37, product_product_42,
product_product_45, product_product_49, product_product_26, product_product_14, product_product_15,
product_product_18, product_product_19, product_product_21, product_product_23
Removed corresponding binaries.
Removed all Bill of Materials demo data, that were ridiculous and replace them by 2 bom: A complete
computer, and a kit computer. Rewritten the tests accordingly.
Fixed tests :
- sale_mrp/test/cancellation_propagated.yml : The yaml ref function return a id, not a dictionnary
- sale_stock/tests/test_sale_stock.py : The service product invoiced on the delivered quantity was
in fact not invoiced on delivery on the test. As we are in sale_stock, Without timesheet, we
manually set the delivered qty for the product serv_del. If we don't do this, the invoice will
never be fully invoiced.
- The pricelist rules choice is not based on the sequence anymore (Seems to be a bug, reported to
online). By the way, I changed the product to avoid the overlap.
- sale_mrp/test/sale_mrp.yml: The yaml ref function return a id, not a dictionnary
- mrp : Rewritten the tests to be coherent with the new bom data
Pricelist computations need to consider 2 different Units
of Measure:
- The default product UoM (product.uom_id), used as reference
for the various quantities and amounts specified in each
pricelist rules.
- The `context UoM` is the UoM in which the result is requested,
that is the list price UoM.
For example the 'price_min_margin' amount is meant for the unit
price of 1 x default UoM. When the context UoM is not the default
product UoM, it can be any UoM of the same UoM Category, and the
various quantities and amounts specified on the rule need to
be adapted accordingly:
- min_quantity (expressed in terms of the default UoM)
- price_surcharge (specified for 1 x default UoM)
- price_min_margin (specified for 1 x default UoM)
- price_max_margin (specified for 1 x default UoM)
The UoM corrections were not done consistently and resulted in
wrong prices when computing the price using a non-default UoM.
The cases were a conversion was needed or not were not properly
identified within the _price_rule_get_multi().
After this commit, the various code branches in _price_rule_get_multi
always ensures that:
- price requested for: `qty` of `qty_uom_id`
- `qty_in_product_uom` is the requested `qty` converted to default UoM
- current (intermediary) price: `price` for `price_uom_id`
Therefore `price` and `price_uom_id` are always in sync, and `price_uom_id`
can always be compared with `qty_uom_id' in order to know whether
a conversion is still needed.
This patch also corrects and extends the regression tests
introduced at revision 79ebe10.
Remove the intermediate rounding inside _compute_qty(), as it
is not necessary after rev. fa2f7b86 and has undesired side-effects.
An extra float_round() operation inside _compute_qty()
had been added at rev. 311c77bb to avoid a float representation
error in UoM factors that could bias the ceiling() operation
done as the last conversion step.
Example 1:
Dozen has a factor of 1/12, which was previously stored in the
database with a decimal accuracy of 12 significant decimal digits.
This meant the factor was exactly stored as 0.08333333333333.
When reading this back into a Python float, the precision was not
sufficient, and the UoM conversion of 1 Dozen to Units gave a
result of 12.00000000000047961...
After the final ceiling() operation to Unit's rounding, the
converted value ended up as 13.
This problem was initially solved using an extra rounding.
However at revision fa2f7b86 the decimal precision used to store
UoM factors was increased to preserve all significant digits.
This added the extra precision necessary to read the Dozen factor
back into an accurate float value of 1/12, and the conversion of
1 Dozen now gives 12.0 Units, even without the intermediate
rounding operation. (Works for other factor values too)
At the same time that extra rounding operation has undesired
side-effects, as it requires a fixed precision derived from
the rounding precisions of the UoMs. But there is no given precision
that would work in all cases for this intermediate value. It is
always possible to find a valid combination of UoM roundings
that breaks that intermediate step, e.g. by forcing integer
roundings.
Example 2:
Let Grams have a rounding precision set to 1 because no smaller
quantities are allowed, and Kilograms a rounding of 0.001 to allow
representing 1 Gram. (gram factor = 1000 and kilogram rounding = .001
by default)
If we try to convert 1234 Grams into Kilograms, the extra rounding
introduced in 311c77bb will cause a rounding of 1234.0/1000.0 at
the precision of Grams (1), which gives 1.0 as a result.
The net result of this conversion gives 1234.0 Gram = 1.0 Kilogram,
while the correct result (1.234 Kilogram) is perfectly compatible
with the UoM settings.
Similar errors could be triggered with various rounding settings, as
long as the intermediate rounding needs a finite precision.
Two extra tests have been added to cover Example 1 and Example 2.
--
Related to #2072, #1125, #1126, #2672Closes#2495, #2498
The price_surcharge attribute must be computed based on the reference unit of measure (divided by the factor).
This is to make sure than 12 units and 1 dozen have the same price after pricelist computation (opw 599727).
Added test checking the correctness of pricelist computation based on unit of measures.
Wolfgang Taferner