There are too many image sizes. Since they are stored resized this takes time to
generate when saving a new image, it's more rows on the attachment table, more
files on the disk, ...
64px is close enough to 128px that it can be removed without a big impact on
download size.
It will even reduce download and number of requests when both images are
displayed because now only one has to be downloaded and then benefit from cache.
The difference between the two is typically around 1.5kB which is negligible
these days, especially when the request overhead is around 0.5kB already, not
even taking into account other factors such as latency.
If a 64px image must absolutely be returned, it is still possible to pass the
size parameters to the image route. But the current guideline is to handle
resizing in the views when necessary.
Views
=====
- remove width and height attributes when existing CSS rules are overriding them
(eg. `.oe_kanban_avatar` in the right context)
- add CSS rules instead of width and height attributes when possible
- use `object-fit: cover;` where width and height are forced to avoid distortion
of non-square images
- for products, use `object-fit: contain;` instead, keep ratio but without crop
- add new CSS rules where the expected size was max 64px*64px before due to the
image size itself
- remove `img-fluid` where using size classes to avoid conflicting rules
task-2060865
closesodoo/odoo#36147
Signed-off-by: Sébastien Theys (seb) <seb@odoo.com>
*= website, website_livechat, website_rating
///// Tracking Product /////
Now when a user browse products in eCommerce, we keep track of the
products he looked at. We use the website_visitor
to store the products viewed. A cookie is added with a TTl of 30 min it
will prevent the RPC for that time. We track the page only if the
product view is tracked.
The recently viewed products are displayed as a snippet but also
with the customize option in product pages of website_sale.
Products that are in cart will not be returned as recently viewed.
It is possible to add a recently viewed product to the cart directly
from the carousel, it will not redirect to the cart. If we are on the
cart page, the product is displayed in the cart.
The Visitor page in website now references products viewed
///// Tracking Page /////
Feature to track a view was remove in: https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/pull/4834
That feature is now reintroduced and will use website_track instead of
leads to be stored.
The track field is now on the view instead of the page.
url field is added to website.track, it will store the url for pages and
views
The Visitor page in website now references urls viewed
Add some tests
task-1984575
closesodoo/odoo#35810
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Kersten (jke) <jke@openerp.com>
PURPOSE
Allow to manage attachments when updating a frontend review.
SPECIFICATIONS
Currently when posting a review in eLearning or eCommerce one can attach
files to its review thanks for portal composer. Rating popup composer allow
to update its comment and rating. However this edit mode has two limitations.
It does not display attachments previously added and does not allow to add
attachments.
This commit fixes that by
* giving attachment values to the composer, allowing its display by the
composer display at startup;
* allowing to give new attachments and properly handle them in slides
route;
Uploaded and validated attachments cannot be removed by users. Indeed
message with attachments has probably already be sent to people and removing
attachments would lead to information loss.
LINKS
Task 2066600 (manage attachments)
Task 2058595 (eLearning v13 testing)
PURPOSE
Allow to manage attachments when updating a frontend review.
SPECIFICATIONS
As those widgets grow it is better to have them in separate files in order to
better understand code organization. Future commits will improve composer
behavior, notably in attachments management.
LINKS
Task 2066600 (manage attachments)
Task 2058595 (eLearning v13 testing)
Purpose is to set review message on both message and rating so that reviews
are correctly displayed in eLearning backend as well as correctly displayed
in chatter frontend.
Task ID 2058595
PR #36281
PURPOSE
Test frontend and UI tools of eLearning.
SPECIFICATIONS
Current implementation of rating using stars is a bit strange and may miss
some clicks, notably in testing tour. Let us fall back on a classic simple
implementation based on clicking on a star.
LINKS
Task ID 1937768
PURPOSE
Allow publishers to add a comment on frontend reviews with ratings. Purpose
is to allow to give some feedback or context on published reviews.
SPECIFICATIONS
In order to answer to a rating message (review) of a course (eLearning) or a
product (eCommerce) we add a way to the publisher to directly comment a review
inside the website rating chatter.
Any publisher can add/edit/remove comment of a rating message from the website.
The goal is not to enter into a discussion but just to give a feedback. This
comment is not sent or propagated to anyone, just displayed for information
purpose.
In portal chatter
* add 1 button below a review "Comment" (for publishers of the website only)
* only one comment possible by review/rating
* when the comment is added, display
* author name, date, comment
* 2 buttons, only visible by the website publisher: edit and delete
LINKS
Task ID : 2026911
closesodoo/odoo#35956
Signed-off-by: Thibault Delavallee (tde) <tde@openerp.com>
PURPOSE
Allow publishers to add a comment on frontend reviews with ratings. Purpose
is to allow to give some feedback or context on published reviews.
SPECIFICATIONS
* rename / reorder some methods according to JS guidelines;
* split portal composer and portal chatter override to better understand
module organization and ease future code additions;
LINKS
Task ID : 2026911
PURPOSE
Fix frontend rating and clean a bit module organization
SPECIFICATIONS
In order to ease understanding of portal chatter dependencies let us name
files according to guidelines. In this commit we rename a bit files in
website mail to understand which widgets and portal parts are impacted by
website mail bridge module.
Assets are also moved in their own file to ease module discovering.
LINKS
Task 2057301
PR #35870
PURPOSE
Fix frontend rating and clean a bit module organization
SPECIFICATIONS
Remove unused template to lessen noise in this module.
LINKS
Task 2057301
PR #35870
PURPOSE
Fix frontend rating and clean a bit module organization
SPECIFICATIONS
Currently when updating a review on slides, the rating value is divided
by 2 on each update as the rating ratio is not taken into account. In this
commit we correctly update the hidden input value during the start function
using the rating ratio.
LINKS
Task 2057301
PR #35870
In mobile view, review display layout is not clean. Stars string is too short
and progressbar is also too short. This is because we have visibility hidden
for 'Remove Selection', visibility property takes space.
In this commit we give more space for stars / text, and in mobile we add an
icon instead of 'Remove Selection' string.
Task 2047409
closesodoo/odoo#35598
Signed-off-by: Thibault Delavallee (tde) <tde@openerp.com>
Remove or move significant HTML attributes on <t> tags
`<t>` is not rendered, so we lose `class`, `role`, `itemprop`, `content`
etc. significant HTML attributes.
In other cases, the `<a>` tag can contain redundant HTML attributes,
which don't make sense (e.g. `href="#"`).
closesodoo/odoo#35391
Signed-off-by: Martin Trigaux (mat) <mat@odoo.com>
The `website_published` field from the website's mixins is basically a readonly
from `is_published` field.
On read, this field will simply read `is_published` and check if the record's
website_id is accessible (only for the multi mixin).
On write, it will always write on `is_published`.
This commit improves a few things:
- A lot of code was writting on website_published which was just then writting
on is_published. Writting directly on is_published makes more sense.
- Some backend fields would still reference `website_published` instead of
`is_published` which would just go through the related for no reason.
Plus, using `is_published` will make the field tooltip more accurate as we
are not in a website context ('Visible on current website' to 'Is Published')
- Filter and search on tree view were still using the `website_published`
related field, which is just a readonly when we are not in a frontend
context.
- Some create and write function would have security check on
`website_published` value but that was wrong as the user could bypass that by
simply writting on `is_published`. For the write method, check `is_published`
is more accurate as it will cover both case since `website_published` will
then call the write method on `is_published`
Multi is the default api for methods, it is not necessary to explicitly
decorate methods with it, adds clutter and most people use it because
they see that the rest of the code uses it.
Done with `find . -type f -name '*.py' | xargs sed -i '/@api.multi/d'`
To avoid eLearning to be spammed, the comment, review and vote behaviours
are now allowed only if the user has enough karma to do it.
Here is the new behaviour on courses and slides rating / comment / vote
-If allow_comment is checked on Course :
- Review (rating) is allowed on Course only if enough karma
- Comment is allowed on slides within the course
only if enough karma and course type is 'training'
- Vote is allowed on slides within the course
only if enough karma and course type is 'documentation'
-If allow_comment is not checked on Course :
- Review (rating) is not allowed on Course
- Comment is not allowed on slides within the course
- Vote is not allowed on slides within the course
- Rating is not allowed on slides within the course anymore
Task ID : 1943788
PR #31321
Last review should be a comment. When fetching the last message on a course
the returned message can be a system notification (like "Channel created").
This is not what we want, mostly with the feature allowing to modify the body
of a message. This commit add restriction on the domain fetch last message.
Fix default rating value on popup widget. The conversation ratio (rating 1-10
and 5 stars) was not applied everywhere. So, the number of displayed stars was
doubled. This is now fixed.
Commit linked to task ID 1941250 and PR #31317.
When rating with the smiley mecanism, the rating value will be 1,
3 or 7. The rating model allow value in range [0, 10]. When using
the star mecanism, usually, only 5 stars are used to introduced a
rating. This will set a rating value in the range [0, 5], which
is not aligned with the range of the model, nor the smiley range.
Purpose of this commit is to uniformize the range of rating, so if a
model is using both mecanism, the average will be correct. Solving
this problem implies to apply a conversion factor between the
database value and the displayed one.
Migration:
As only product.template was using star mecanism in odoo community,
a migration step should be applied to multiply of ratings of
product.template by 2.
Task-1941432
closesodoo/odoo#31141
Odoo Translation Bot