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
Before this commit, if you create an automated action with trigger 'on_change'
it was not called because the run() function don't have active_id.
Now if we have onchange_self in the context but not active id, we call the
function nevertheless. (withtout active_id in context!)
closesodoo/odoo#27167
- Create a Customer location (CL) and set a Company on it
- Configure Product A in FIFO / Perpetual
- Receive 2 Unit(s) of A in Stock
- Create an Internal Transfer
1 Unit(s) of Product A
Source location: Stock
Destination Location: CL
- Validate
The Inventory Valuation report incorrectly retrieves a quantity of 2 in
stock instead of 1.
The error is first due to a misconfiguration: the CL should not have a
Company set. However, we should not take into account any quantity in a
customer location, even if there is a Company set.
opw-1884675
opw-1884835
closesodoo/odoo#27145
Make sure that the company is not set on the customer and supplier
locations of the demo data. Otherwise, any quant in these locations will
be set a `company_id`, which is incorrect (e.g. valuation report will be
incorrect).
opw-1884835
closesodoo/odoo#27144
In ac1e187ee some unecessary code and RPC were removed by ignoring
attachments in the sidebar when they would never be shown.
But there was an regression since `updateEnv` function would not
longer call redraw (which is also called in _super function).
report: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/ac1e187eea3#r30569171
related to opw-1865736
closes#27146
- Open a partner view, click on Action > Partner Review
- Switch to another partner
- Click again on Action > Partner Review
The Google Doc file of the second partner is the same than the first
partner.
This is due to `_onGoogleDocItemClicked` which is always called with the
same `resID`, i.e. the `resID` used at `start`.
We retrieve the active ID at each click instead.
opw-1882068
closesodoo/odoo#27132
Activate the group in the sale module: Sections on sale orders
Print an invoice
Before this commit, there were twice the same table filled with the invoice lines
After this commit, only one table and the right one is printed
OPW 1885549
closesodoo/odoo#27137
Steps to reproduce the bug:
On a new db, just launch:
./odoo-bin --addons-path=../enterprise,./addons --test-enable -d s11 -i l10n_be,account_accountant,stock,sale_management,purchase
An error occured in test_02_check_mto_chain due to the supplier taxes set on the product.
opw:1878341
closesodoo/odoo#27069
We clarify the `stock.quant.package` view to highlight the difference
between the case where the content is retrieved from the move lines or
the quants.
Otherwise, this is confusing for a user who sees the same record with
the same view, but not the same content.
opw-1883714
closesodoo/odoo#27098
Use case: have a partner in fr_FR while operating with a user in en_US
Create a SO for that partner
add a product which name is translated in french
Before this commit, the description of the sale order line takes the
*untranslated* name of the product
After this commit, it takes the *translated* name of the product
The issue was due to a limitation of sudoing within an onchange for related fields
(typically the case of product.product.name)
In this case, values that are missing in the cache are retrieved from another one
In our case:
First, _onchange_product_id_check_availability triggers the evaluation
of product.name as sudo (later in the stack), without lang in context
Second, the function that actually uses the product.name (product_id_change)
retrieves the value found before from the 'wrong' cache
OPW 1863305, 1884106
closes#27031
- Create a PO with 5 units of A and 10 units of B
- Receive the products
- Return the picking, but return 12 units of A and 10 units of B
The first picking (done state) will contain:
- 7 units of A, 0 qty done => it is an extra move
- 10 units of B, 10 qty done
But another picking (not done) is created, with
- 5 units of A, 12 qty done
The core of the issue is that the `origin_returned_move_id` is not
copied on the extra move. Therefore, it is not merged by `_merge_moves`
since the latter field is in the list of
`_prepare_merge_moves_distinct_fields`.
opw-1882959
- Set the product A in FIFO, real-time valuation
- Receive 5 units @ 2000 each
- Create a landed cost of 1000, apply on the picking
=> the cost of A is 2200
- Sell one unit
- Create another landed cost of 1000, apply on the same picking
The cost of A is 2360, while one expects 2400.
The value of the move after the second landed cost is computed as:
value = previous value + prorata of landed cost 2
= 11000 + (1000 * 4/5)
= 11800
This is not correct. The whole value of the second landed cost should be
taken into account for the `value` field. The prorata is only useful for
the field `remaining_value`.
opw-1878229
When localisation modules such as l10n_no are installed, the test
TestAngloSaxonCommon broke.
We isolate the test more by setting the right accounts on the products to make
the test pass.
This is useful for odoo.sh clients that install localisation modules and see the
tests break.
opw 1881014
When a sale is done on the website, a corresponding sale order is created in the
backend. By default the salesperson and sales team associated to the sale are as
defined on the website.
When we prepare values, we fallback on the partner sales team in a way that is
coherent with the way it falls back on the partner for the salesperson.
opw 1882640
Have the main company (A) with the public user
Have an invoice in company B
Make a brand new browser access the invoice with the token
Before this commit: the token link ended up asking the customer to login,
eventhough it wouldn't if the invoice were in company A
After this commit: the whole payment with access token flow works as expected.
OPW 1879999
closes#26744
On mobile, some barcodes didn't trigger in the picking screens, notably
O-BTN.validate. This is due to the use of parent() to check if the
button is in a dropdown, as parent() only checks one DOM-level upwards.
The button being inside a <ul><li>, we need to check more levels than
one to pass the condition and trigger the button press.
By changing parent() to parents(), the entire chain will be checked, not
just one level, and the button press is correctly triggered.
opw-1860964
closes#25941
Before this commit, the style of the value and text in some stat buttons were
broken.
The design of the stat button is to have a single value and a single text which
are stacked as follow:
[CSS] [Visually] [Example]
.o_stat_info +---------+ +------------+
.o_stat_value | | | |
.o_stat_text | value | | 10 |
| text | | Forecasted |
| | | |
+---------+ +------------+
However, some stat buttons use multiple values or texts. For example:
[CSS] [Visually] [Example]
.o_stat_info +-------------+ +------------+
.o_stat_value | | | |
.o_stat_info | value text | | 3 Hour(s) |
.o_stat_value | text | | Lost |
.o_stat_text | | | |
.o_stat_text +-------------+ +------------+
[CSS] [Visually] [Example]
.o_stat_info +---------------+ +---------------+
.o_stat_text | | | |
.o_stat_text | text value | | Min: 10.00 |
.o_stat_info | text value | | Max: 20.00 |
.o_stat_value | | | |
.o_stat_value +---------------+ +---------------+
The latter is works fine with block, which guarantees vertical alignment.
However, the former case has some alignment issues like this:
[Visually]
+------------+
| |
| 3 |
| Hour(s) |
| Lost |
| |
+------------+
This is due to the use of `display:block` for any `.o_stat_text` and `.o_stat_text`.
This commit fixes this issue, without affecting the other cases.
Task-ID 1841523
Courtesy of Juan José Scarafía, ADHOC
The quality of the Spanish (Argentina) translations is very poor.
Remove them all and will start from scratch, translating only when needed.
Let's install base_vat_autocomplete and base_address_extended
When creating a contact with a VAT number, the street was not
formated by the autocomplete in a correct way because the function checkVat all the time
returns the street with the following format: '%(street_name)s, %(street_number)s/%(street_number2)s'
and this function doesn't take the street format of the country into account.
So the function _split_street tried to split the street into street_name, street_number, street_number2 with the
street_format of the partner but the street was not well formated by checkVat.
opw:1867491
Rendering in html was correct thanks to the webkit-padding-start 40px added
by the browser. But once printed with wkhtml, the padding was missing.
Now we force the padding manually.
This commit closes#7375
Before this commit, there was a traceback when clicking on a button
that generates a button call action with type `'button'`.
This is due to the handler of such an action that assumes only a small
set of button actions. Each of those cases correctly sets the local
variable `def` to a deferred, so that the post-processing is correct
(i.e. it handles this variable as a deferred). However, this is wrong
with a different button call action, so that this variable is `undefined`
instead of a deferred.
This commit fixes the issue by ensuring that the variable `def` is always
a deferred. As a result, the post-processing can make the correct assumption
that this variable is a deferred.
Steps to reproduce:
- Install Google Drive Integration app
- Go to General Settings
- In the category "Google Drive", click on "Get Authorization Code"
(displayed as "Get Author...")
Task-ID 1861630
When there is no ACL for a model, the system emits a log with a sample
ACL entry that developers should consider adding. This proposed ACL
should be safe: a default read-only access for internal users
seems appropriate.
Closes#25919
The message don't show the name of product.
Before the fix:
The message was: "It is not possible to reserve more products of than you have in stock."
After the fix:
The message is: "It is not possible to reserve more products of [0221] Product A than you have in stock."
opw:1868449
Lucas Perais (lpe)