- When a tracked field is modified, a mail.message is created.
When create is called its tries to fill missing values with "default
values".
It first tries to find the default values in the context, which may
occurs.
For example, modifying a tracked field on a subtask will add a key
"default_parent_id" in the context, which is the parent_id of the project.task.
Create will try to use "default_parent_id" for the mail.message
parent_id field, which make the SQL Request invalid.
On a new DB with demo data, as Demo User:
- Create a partner
- Unlink the partner
An `AccessError` is raised.
The error is raised on `ir.property`, for the field
`property_product_pricelist`. An entry was indeed automatically created
at partner creation. However, a regular user is not allowed to delete an
`ir.property`.
The property can be safely deleted as SUPERUSER as long as the proper
unlink access rights have been tested beforehand.
opw-1870737
This reverts commit 2054b59285 which
already has been fixed multiple times [0].
However this change does not correctly handle successive onchange calls on
ony2many fields which alter existing rows.
i.e., in saas~11.4, an onchange has been added on move lines [1] in
order to create and/or update lines containing taxes amounts.
However, with diff-only onchange, a second call to onchange will discard
changes made by a first one as nothing change between the 2 calls.
Scenario: On an existing account.move, add a new credit line with a tax set.
The first onchange will update the tax line with new amount. Add a
second line (with debit amount balanced). The onchange will not change
the tax line, resulting as it value being reset to initial value. As a
result, the move is not balanced and cannot be saved.
[0] cd2ccc4110, 5e58ac16c3, 07023137cd
[1] d49ab568a2
Since 2054b59 if we created a record in a many2many relationship of an
onchange, we would also possibly erreneously return the NewId.
The logic of convert_to_onchange of _RelationalMulti doesn't send back
the ID field (if the ID is needed, it is part of the command, not the
update/create dictionary values of a command) and this commit does the
same for the code changed in 2054b59.
This commit also adds a test for this fix, and a test for the regression
corrected with cd2ccc4110 reported in #25969
fix for https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/2054b5928#commitcomment-29837226closes#25984
Without the call to `super`, with at least two level off expected
onchange return data (eg. `invoice_lines.name`) we have an error in
python2, python3 python implementation of OrderedDict and possibly other
python implementation.
So this worked most often (with python3 CPython C implementation of
OrderedDict) by chance.
closes#25960
With website_version, when publishing a version and copying the current version,
the copy_translation wrote a new translation for the copy of master in the published
view instead of the copied view.
Reason:
When writing in the view, odoo checked in the context the current version and
wrote in the view corresponding to the key and the verion seen in the website.
So when copying a view, it translated the copied view instead of the copy of
the view.
The write is made by the function copy_translation with the line:
"new_wo_lang[name] = old_wo_lang[name]"
opw:1856150
In 10.0, the resolution of the m2o field in a read group was
done with a `read` (which sudo the name_get). So, the access
rights were bypassed to get the display_name of the related
records.
In 11.0, a call to `name_get` but not as `sudo` causing access
error in some case. For instance;
- a user has read access on project
- he log some timesheets
- its access to project is removed, but not the timesheet ones
- trying to access its own timesheet via the grid view (which does
a read_group)
- the user gets the access error for project.
The read_group should reproduce the behavior of the `read` method,
so the `name_get` for m2o field during a read_group is now sudoed
to restore previous behavior.
opw-1855942
* export benches for m2o
* tag benches instead of requiring editing the source to enable them
* dump the profiling stats intead of saving to disk (less convenient
for complex analysis but way more so for simple overview)
* add M2O benching in addition to the existing integer-based one in
order to expose problematic behaviour when exporting significant
numbers of non-shared relational records (& quantify impact of
creation v read)
Following odoo/odoo#22493 the performances of exporting XIDs was
greatly improved by batching XIDs and avoiding the ~3 SQL queries per
xid/record when no xid exists yet.
*However* the batching was done per call of _export_rows and to handle
relational fields _export_rows calls itself recursively leading to
sub-standard xid batching:
* for M2M and O2M fields, some batching would happen on a
parent-record basis, each M2M or O2M field (in a parent) would be
xid-batched, but two parent records wouldn't see their children
xid-batched together
* for M2O, there would be essentially no batching with a call to
__ensure_xml_id per record and while less queries than before in the
worst case more complex ones in fact
Change: rather than ensure XIDs exist when performing the export, add
XIDs export as a post-processing of the exported records table. This
way, each involved model can be entirely batched and exporting 10000
records's (id, value_id/id) 2 calls instead of 10001.
Also rename _export_rows's recursion parameter for clarity, it has
clearly outgrown its use as a batch invalidation flag and the name
is now less than clear.
Furthermore _-prefix & mandate kwarg usage to make it clearer it's not
really a "public" parameter, and is intended as an internal recursion
flag.
When ir.values was removed and the "action" ir.values were merged
directly into the actions themselves, "client_action_relate" was
discarded as unused (and possibly too similar to
client_action_multi?). *However*:
* it was actually used implicitly as "relate" was the default key2 of
the <act_window> XML tag
* and it had a crucial difference from client_action_multi:
client_action_multi is shown on both form and list views by default
and only on list if multi=True, whereas relate is shown on *either*
the form or list view (tree if multi else form)
This means without relate the actions which should be only visible on
the form view are now on both list and tree, which leads to
overpopulated `Action` menus and odd behaviours (e.g. actions relying
active_id on lists, which id do they get and why?)
=> reintroduce relate as "action_form_only" for the specific case of
multi=False and either no key2 or a key2 of client_action_relate. If
multi=True then binding_type=action.
Fixes#20124
Followup: Task 1843603 to remove #multi and redundancy
New records (with a NewId) are not necessary in the cache, but should
not be prefetched.
This check has been omitted during optimisation in b0c08a6846.
opw-1843566
opw-1843636
opw-1843683
opw-1843548
opw-1843629
opw-1843657
Closes#24595
Christophe Simonis