Currently there is no efficient way to suggest extra-options to
customers in PoS or eCommerce. Extra options should be easily selected
by customers (or PoS waiters) with checkbox. Each checked option would
add an extra-price to the product price and appear on tickets,
receipts, invoices, kitchen display, ...
This commit introduces a new type of attribute: multi-checkbox. This
will not create product variants. A default extra-cost is defined at the
attribute level, but it can be changed at the product level.
The new attribute is available in Sales, not yet in eCommerce nor in PoS
(it will be in a future task).
task-3256585
closesodoo/odoo#130915
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
The previous commit introduced an optimization to reduce the number of
queries and fields fetched when we call `name_search`. But it works much
better when the dependencies of `display_name` contain field names used
in the calculation (on the same record/model).
Then, to improve the performance and the cache coherency, add `depends`
and `depends_context` depending on the custom `_compute_display_name`.
Add only the first level of dependencies (never traverse relational
field) because only these have a positive impact on the previous
optimization and the cost is very low (see `modified`).
About `depends_context`, we don't include `lang` because (when `_` is
used by example) it is unlikely to get the same display_name in the same
request with two different lang.
closesodoo/odoo#122085
Related: odoo/documentation#4639
Related: odoo/enterprise#42599
Related: odoo/upgrade#4780
Signed-off-by: Raphael Collet <rco@odoo.com>
Rationale
=========
Since v8, the `display_name` field is present on all models. By default,
`display_name` uses `name_get` which has pretty much the same purpose
(return record name used by the web client). Gradually, many (backend)
developers (and the ORM: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/6da1c3ac4c036eac289597602976538e243cb939)
started using `display_name` (more convenient than
`record.name_get()[0][1]`) but it still had the `name_get` override.
It becomes more complex than necessary and poeple start to misunderstand
the two (and sometimes override both, leading to inconstiencies between
`display_name`/`name_get`).
To simplify the ORM and the API, we decided to keep only one of them,
the `display_name` field:
- It is much more convenient from a backend point of view
(`record.name_get()[0][1]` vs `record.display_name`)
- It is cached during the same transaction (and invalidated if
its dependencies change)
- It can be overridden like any other compute field (override
`_compute_display_name` with any extra dependencies)
- `name_get` is replaced by `read(['display_name'])`
(API perceptive), which can actually be more efficient
(if `display_name`'s depends are correct, the ORM will only fetch the
fields it needs instead of every prefetchable field)
Changes
=======
- Deprecates `name_get` for the v17 and based the method on
`display_name` (the opposite of before)
- Converts all usage of `name_get`
- Overrides of `name_get` are now overrides of `_compute_display_name`
- For `res.partner`, rename the field store `display_name` into
`complete_name` because `display_name` context-dependent and it makes
no sense to have a compute store that is context-dependent.
- Previously, it was possible to return multiple names for the same
record with `name_get`, but it was tricky and most of the usage of
this `name_get` didn't take this into account. The only example of
this is the `name_get` of `product.product`
(now use `", ".join(<names>)`).
Part-of: odoo/odoo#122085
What are the steps to reproduce your issue?
- Create a product with more than one attribute.
- Let say color White, black and purple
- Create a 'draft' invoice for the purple product variant
- Remove the 'purple' attribute value from the product
- It will archive that variant (because the account.move linked to it)
- Try to delete the attribute value from menu Sales > Cofinfiguration > Attribute
What is the current behavior that you observe?
- technical error message
What would be your expected behavior in this case?
- non-technical message for end-users
Solution :
- Change both message to tell user he cannot delete the value if the value has been referenced somewhere else.
opw-2623583
missing forward-port of db1e52f0234f73e1bda22a411baba7b1f0994d5a
closesodoo/odoo#120495
X-original-commit: 0c8c43d50a574d73d9d5ac925eb16faf730a76ba
Signed-off-by: Morgane Demesmaeker <edm@odoo.com>
Valentin Vallaeys (vava)