While creating a new product in product category with barcode value in inventory
module, `_check_barcode_uniqueness` method is called. In which variable 'domain'
is passed, and getting wrong value.
Steps to Produce:-
1) Go to Inventory then configuration
2) Click on 'Product Categories' under products
3) Click/Create Product Category
4) Click stat button 'product'
5) Create a product
6) Then add barcode value
7) Click on Save
8) Trace-back will be generated
Reason:-
While creating new product from product category when user add the barcode value
in product form, the '_check_barcode_uniqueness' method is called. In this
method the value of 'domain' is getting updated by reference from variable
'domain' from method '_search' present in the same model.
This results in a traceback with the message
'Invalid field product.packaging.categ_id'.
Applying these changes will resolve this issue.
sentry - 4073963761
closesodoo/odoo#121072
X-original-commit: ce9889e314ae696773ce040f662569e281abe700
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Lempereur (nle) <nle@odoo.com>
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>
Following 83c52575d0 we activated or created pricelists as soon as a
currency was activated/created/deleted, for every company that might already have another
pricelist setup done, which was quite confusing.
With this fix, we ensure this will only happen:
- at company creation
- when enabling the pricelist feature
- when enabling the multi-currency setting (only the first time, unless the pricelists were
disabled manually afterward)
closesodoo/odoo#120039
X-original-commit: 4c0146d939e40e9433794802388cf06147e716f2
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Morgane Demesmaeker <edm@odoo.com>
before this commit, when deleting a product
category from a db where expense category
is already deleted before this commit [1]
is raising exception
after this commit, exception wont be shown
in existing db where expense category is
deleted.
1 https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/09e4b2fb586ac83adb984672e027ce6dd62affb2closesodoo/odoo#119754
X-original-commit: 20b5518110b233ba3b59158a8362db04b9a89aad
Signed-off-by: Yannick Tivisse (yti) <yti@odoo.com>
When your pricelist item price is based on an other prcicelist in
another currency, the wrong currency is given to the function
_get_product_price. we sould give the currency of the base_pricelist
instead of the target one.
Here is a example:
We have a priclist in INR based on a pricelist in USD. And the company
currency is euro.
When we go for the first time in '_compute_base_price', where we'll call
_get_product_price to get the price from the base pricelist (the $ one)
We get as src_currency the USD and target the INR. Since we are calling
_get_product_price with INR as currency, when _get_product_price will
call _compute_base_price, we'll get EUR as src_currency and INR as
target.
This will lead to apply on the EU price (the one on the product) the
rate of EUR->INR then apply over it USD -> INR. Instead of EUR -> USD
and then USD -> INR
closesodoo/odoo#119505
X-original-commit: 8ace9942368688dc1183133f451ea788a03e0f14
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Masereel Pierre <pim@odoo.com>
The product configurator dialog was still in legacy code as it was not
required for the migration of the views to OWL. Now that we're moving
forward with the removal of other parts of the legacy code, this dialog
had to be converted as well.
Some parts of the logic have now been rewritten in OWL, getting a better
share of the logic between the server and the client.
The product configurator in e-commerce still uses the old implementation
and will be refactored in another task.
task-3056806
closesodoo/odoo#106511
Related: odoo/enterprise#39525
Related: odoo/upgrade#4550
Signed-off-by: Valentin Chevalier <vcr@odoo.com>
According to Wiktionary, French spacing is "the archaic practice (though
still current in French) of inserting a space around colons, semicolons,
question marks, and exclamation marks". This is not standard practice in
English and most languages of the world.
The purpose of this commit is to start purging the code from this typo,
as it may reflect poorly on the software for some people.
closesodoo/odoo#116167
Related: odoo/enterprise#38542
Signed-off-by: Louis Wicket (wil) <wil@odoo.com>
According to Wiktionary, French spacing is "the archaic practice (though
still current in French) of inserting a space around colons, semicolons,
question marks, and exclamation marks". This is not standard practice in
English and most languages of the world.
The purpose of this commit is to start purging the code from this typo,
as it may reflect poorly on the software for some people.
closesodoo/odoo#114533
Related: odoo/enterprise#37853
Signed-off-by: Sébastien Theys (seb) <seb@odoo.com>
This API is much more sensible for making subqueries. Specifically, one
can generate a subquery without the clauses LIMIT and ORDER BY.
Part-of: odoo/odoo#112126
This simplifies the use of subqueries by avoiding some costly default
order on the model or the idiotic order='id'. Method _flush_search()
has been adapted accordingly.
Part-of: odoo/odoo#112126
The parameter in search() is redundant with method search_count(), and
was making the calls less readable.
The method _search() is aimed at always returning a Query object. The
method can therefore never return an integer, hence the removal of the
parameter. This does not actually remove any functionality from the
method; counting result is simply given by using it differently.
Part-of: odoo/odoo#112126
Step to reproduce issue:
- Go to sales settings, activate "Unit of Measure"
- Set user define default of field "uom_id" of model "product.template"
- install "loyalty" module.
While loading file "addons/loyalty/data/loyalty_data.xml" file it will create product and gives traceback.
Or
- It will also give error while upgrade database from 14.0 to 15.0 or more
Note : This error occurs while there is user-define value for uom_id is set and any module tries to
create product from data file.
Current behavior:
- When product creates, uom_id and uom_po_id gets default uom value from
"_get_default_uom_id" method which return "Unit" uom as default.
But when user have default value for uom_id(let's suppose Days), it sets that default
value and for uom_po_id we got uom value as "Unit".
- So now as uom category of Days and Unit are not same it violates "_check_uom" constraint.
Traceback: https://pad.odoo.com/p/utpr-set_default_uom
Soultion:
- When product creates, if there is default value for field uom_id in "ir.default" then
"_get_default_uom_id" method sets same value for uom_po_id.
closesodoo/odoo#113300
X-original-commit: 33a20cf799a6cbca6a55cb82f90c4451df60fa1c
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
This method is not used by rpc calls and wrongly allowed users to read the standard_price
field by calling the method through rpc.
Make it private to reduce its uses and avoid this potential leak of information.
closesodoo/odoo#113234
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
Clarify the uses and impacts of current_attributes_price_extra and
no_variant_attributes_price_extra context keys.
Group the key specification and usage.
Provide a clear API shared by templates and variants.
Part-of: odoo/odoo#113234
Makes the `product.packaging` `product_id` required in the model instead
of the view only, since a packaging is supposed to always be relative to
a product.
Edits some views to add the default product in the context and makes the
field readonly if there is no `product_id` (that way, the user can't
no more create packaging without product).
Also, removes the domain in the action to display the packaging list
view so the user can see if there are some packagings without product
and can eventually delete them.
task-3076044
Part-of: odoo/odoo#109511
- Places the buttons added in `stock` before the "Print Labels" button,
that way, the "Update Quantity" button is always the first button;
- Adds some depends on compute's methods, so that way it displays the
"On Hand" and the "Forecasted" stat buttons, and the weight and volume
UOM even if the product is new and the record wasn't saved yet;
- Adds the "Update Quantity" button in the product's forecasted report
and removes useless attributes of the "Replenishment" button;
task-3076044
Part-of: odoo/odoo#109511
It is currently not possible to write the barcode of an archived
product template. The inverse method does not consider case where
the variant of the template is archived
OPW-3109967
closesodoo/odoo#110697
X-original-commit: 968d0dff823f8e5d0871feaf8b09233fbb91b4de
Signed-off-by: Adrien Widart <awt@odoo.com>
Removes the constraint of using a pricelist and makes all sales flows
rely on the currency of the sale order (or repair order)
task-2735672
closesodoo/odoo#84920
Related: odoo/enterprise#24716
Related: odoo/upgrade#3642
Signed-off-by: Morgane Demesmaeker <edm@odoo.com>
Currently the standard price for products with FIFO as cost_method, show
the price of the next product to go out. It could be confusing on the
report page because the standard price * quantity is different than the
stock value. Another issue, is the margin, they are only computed on the
last piece even if we sell multiple ones.
For example:
MOVE IN 5 units @ 10$
MOVE IN 5 units @ 20$
If we do an order for 10 units at 30$ each we will have a margin of
200$ (30$ - 10$)*10. And the report page will be 10*10$ --> 150$.
The purpose of this task is to have always a report correct. For the
margin it will not be always true because it's depending the number of
pieces that we sell. In the above example:
- if we sell 9 units, the margin will be better with this patch
135$/130$ with this commit and 90$/130$ without
- but if we sell 6 units it will be closer to reality with the old patch.
90$/70$ and without 60$/70$
It has other implications: the inventory adjustement and edition of
moves will now takes the AVCO values and not the next to go out.
With the upper example if we add 10 units following an inventory
adjustement (10 * `standard_price`):
- With this commit: 150$
- Current behavior: 100$
Globally it will be closer to reality for products with a price having
a lot of variance and it won't change for the other.
Task-2918885
closesodoo/odoo#108468
Signed-off-by: William Henrotin (whe) <whe@odoo.com>
STEPS: Create a Pricelist with price rule discount-based on parent product
category. Result: the price rule discount is not applied if the product is not
directly attached to a parent category.
Fix it by correcting domain in `_get_applicable_rules_domain`.
Also, update tests: use parent category in the pricelist.
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/dc8db07ba718a2de845455efc6e265213537eedf
opw-3080836
closesodoo/odoo#107769
X-original-commit: ce44c045f6b75fa64962625baad322632a9c2979
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
The main goal of this commit is to reduce the size of the registry by
removing the (almost) useless __last_update field.
Statistics # of fields with all modules installed:
before 30184 fields, 1299x last_update (4.30%)
Before this commit, the computed field __last_update was added on every model.
The idea behind this field was to have a computed field that had either
the write_date or the create_date if the write_date was empty. However,
the write_date is always written, even on creation, making it useless
to have the computed field __last_update
After this update, we completely remove from BaseModel:
* __last_update
* CONCURRENCY_CHECK_FIELD that was always defined as "__last_update"
* _compute_concurrency_field that was the compute function for __last_update
closesodoo/odoo#105739
Task-id: 3062140 (part of 3062137 improve registry load time)
Related: odoo/upgrade#4038
Related: odoo/enterprise#33939
Signed-off-by: Raphael Collet <rco@odoo.com>
In pricelist form view and product form view, pricelist rules are now invisible if referring to an archived product or an archived pricelist.
task-2920563
closesodoo/odoo#105112
Related: odoo/enterprise#33910
Related: odoo/upgrade#4028
Signed-off-by: Arnaud Joset <arj@odoo.com>
Prior to this commit, the image placeholder lacked contrast and wasn't
readable in small size (eg. in the kanban view).
This commit improves this placeholder.
task-2760590
closesodoo/odoo#105296
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
Purpose is to cleanup code: stop using help parameter name (use help_message as
help is a keyword), try to call super(), ...
Task-2710804 (Mail: Clean MailThread Posting API)
Prepares Task-36879 (Mail: Support MultiCompany Aliases)
Part-of: odoo/odoo#105992
For the sale scope, we added a new 'pricelist_item_id' field, caching
the pricelist rule used for the price_unit and discount computation.
This feature uses the new `_get_pricelist_rule` method, which only returns
the pricelist rule matching the SOline values.
But the `_get_pricelist_rule` method still does all the price computation
for 'nothing'.
This commit skips the price computation (and the search of sub-rules if
the rule found is based on another pricelist).
closesodoo/odoo#103629
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
After this commit, the settings of coupons, promotions,
gift cards and loyalty cards are now managed under a
single one field in PoS Settings configuration. Moreover,
this settings field is "global" and shared between the
eCommerce and Sales app.
task-2959620
closesodoo/odoo#99060
Related: odoo/upgrade#3842
Signed-off-by: Masereel Pierre <pim@odoo.com>
*: base, mrp_account, product, mail, website_blog, website_event,
website_forum
This commit improves the button that allows to go to the backend view of
an object when you are on its corresponding page on the website. The
button is more visible and the user can see which object he is going to
edit. Note that this commit also:
- Changes the access key to translate a website page to ALT + T.
- Adds a new access key to edit an object in backend with ALT + E.
- Removes the possibility to duplicate a blog post (but this feature
will be reintroduced later for all models, generically) **.
**: Note that the duplication of blog posts actually had a mistake:
The controller to create a new blog post has been added with [1] where
it has been decided to not be a follower of the blog posts at their
creation. A new controller has been added by [2] to be able to duplicate
a blog post, to be consistent with [1], here also the user does not
become a follower of the new blog post (the copy). So far, so good.
Finally, [3] has changed the blog post creation controller so that the
user who creates the blog post is a follower of the new blog post.
Unfortunately the same change was not made for the duplicate controller,
which is a mistake. There is no reason to be a follower of the newly
created blog posts when you go through the add blog post controller but
not when you go through the duplication controller. The behaviors should
be consistent and there is no reason for there to be a difference.
[1]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/4c3b516a7b988d758a67ff19242e8ed0837d756c
[2]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/fe40538aff2b65f7719840c8e2d6e51e858f560f
[3]: https://github.com/odoo/odoo/commit/4bf9dc4078a5ca413539a6fd16400fd5aad46907
task-2889929
closesodoo/odoo#97353
Related: odoo/enterprise#30075
Signed-off-by: Quentin Smetz (qsm) <qsm@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: qsm-odoo <qsm@odoo.com>
Reproduction:
1. Create a dynamic attribute "dyn_att" with a couple of values
2. Create a product template "dyn_prod" with those attribute values
3. Create an order for "dyn_prod", this will trigger creating a variant
4. Make sure to check Variant Grid Entry in Sales Settings
5. Open variant form view of dyn_prod and edit it to allow duplication
6. Duplicating it leads to an error
Reason: copying the variant is not possible and disabled here:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/38303 For future convenience, maybe
it’s better to give a temporal working solution. The function
_create_first_product_variant is used in the product module but only
defined in its child module website_sale
Fix: copy the product template, create and return its first possible
variant. Added test for dynamic variant copy. change the definition
place of _create_first_product_variant to module product
opw-2790543
closesodoo/odoo#98809
X-original-commit: 34a2948d3d6e0f597c1b5d65f9f118e891c07cc4
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Lempereur (nle) <nle@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Liu Jinjiu (jili) <jili@odoo.com>
- Merge `_check_barcode_unique` and `_check_barcode_uniqueness`.
- Simplify the code and avoid costly read_group
- Add missing index on barcode of `product.product` (before there was an
unique constraint)
(Note that the constraints isn't transactional safe because it is not an
SQL contraints)
closesodoo/odoo#96043
Signed-off-by: William Henrotin (whe) <whe@odoo.com>
This commit aims at removing unuseful help message to:
1/ reduce translators work, to focus on more useful translations
2/ not sending unuseful information in load_views
3/ reduce help message to useful messages, so that we can mark
fields having a tooltip in the future UI.
4/ some cleanup of existing messages too
The main use cases:
- REMOVED: help redundant with the field name, providing no extra info
- MOVED TO COMMENT: technical help messages, that should not be in UX
closesodoo/odoo#97279
Signed-off-by: Fabien Pinckaers <fp@odoo.com>
Steps to reproduce the product:
- Create a new product:
- Select “Service” type
- Go to the Sales tab:
- Select "Create a task in an existing project" in the `service
tracking` field
- the `project` field becomes visible
- Change the Type of the product to “Consumable”
- Try to save
Problem:
The field `project` remains visible and as it is a required field,
we have to fill it in before being able to save the product.
While it is a feature only for service-type products
Solution:
- The `project` field is based on the `service_tracking` field
to become invisible or not. So when the product is not of service type,
we must remove the tracking service so that the project field
becomes invisible.
- Prevent the user from changing the type of products already used in
a sale order
opw-2858064
closesodoo/odoo#93804
X-original-commit: 102951140e3f35ced8653d4bedb82b63bb2c963f
Signed-off-by: Laurent Stukkens (ltu) <ltu@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Djamel Touati (otd) <otd@odoo.com>
When filtering on product templates with a negative operator, the
result
is incorrect
To reproduce the issue:
(Need mrp)
1. Create two products P_compo, P_finished:
- Internal Reference:
- P_compo: 123
- P_finished: 456
2. Create a BoM:
- Product: P_finished
- Components:
- 1 x P_compo
3. Manufacturing > Master Data > Bills Of Materials
4. Remove search filters and apply this custom one:
- "Product doesn't contain 456"
Error: P_finished's BoM is still in the list, but '456' is the internal
reference of P_finished, so this BoM should not be displayed
The filter is applied on the field `product_tmpl_id` of the BoM, which
leads to the override of `_name_search` in `product.template`. In this
method, a call to the `_name_search` of `product.product` is executed:
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5ff4eb022757d7a522ccb975f8eb64053ef9780b/addons/product/models/product_template.py#L456
which is a good thing because the version of `product.product` handles
the case of the Internal Reference (`default_code`)
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/1e8982e4cf6b604e4da2773f10bdf6cf94c7e683/addons/product/models/product.py#L532-L538
So, the call to this `_name_search` will not return P_finished. However,
later on in the `_name_search` of `product.template`, we call the
`_name_search` of `super` with the same domain (i.e., 'not 456 in name')
https://github.com/odoo/odoo/blob/5ff4eb022757d7a522ccb975f8eb64053ef9780b/addons/product/models/product_template.py#L474-L485
This is the issue: it leads to the `_name_search` of `BaseModel`, which
is the classic version: it does only consider the record's name. So,
this call will return P_finished.
In the `_name_search` of `product.template`, there are actually two
calls to `super`. Considering the commits [1] and [2], it seems that the
goal is the same in both cases: find the `product.template` that do have
any variant yet. However, in the first commit, the domain given to
`super` excludes the templates that have at least one variant, which is
not the case with the second commit (the "problematic" one).
Since both codes have the same goal, we should merge them by keeping the
best idea of each one. From [1], we keep the idea of restricting the
domain: we only look for templates that do not have any variant.
However, this domain needs to be improved: we need to include the
templates whose all variants are archived. From [2], we keep the idea of
looking for the templates outside the `while True` loop. This allows us
to do the search only if required.
[1] 21ae503
[2] 99bae2c
OPW-2791255
closesodoo/odoo#90248
X-original-commit: 942814844e982cbaec2329709c6ba9dd810d0c3f
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Lempereur (nle) <nle@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Adrien Widart <awt@odoo.com>
Steps to reproduce the bug:
- Create a product attribute “PA”:
- Variants Creation Mode: Never
- Value: “PA1”
- Create a storable product “test”:
- Add the attribute “PA“ and the variant “PA1”
- Save
- Archive the product and then remove the attribute from the product
- Unarchive the product
So the product has no longer the attribute line but if we check the
attribute itself, it is still having the product as a related one.
Problem:
When we remove the line attribute, the `_compute_products` is called,
but as the product “test” is archived, when we try to access the
related products of the product attribute, it returns an empty recordset
because the ORM only returns active records.
Since the attribute `product_tmpl_ids` seems empty and we try to update
it with an empty value, the ORM considers there is no change and so, it
does not update the field value in the DB.
Solution:
We must use `active_test=False` when accessing the related products, so
the ORM returns all records, active or archived.
And since there is indeed a linked product and we are trying to
overwrite it with an empty recordset, the change will be effective.
opw-2806316
closesodoo/odoo#90166
X-original-commit: 7d304078b4ed97d23ec84609e6aea137e8500a18
Signed-off-by: Steve Van Essche <svs@odoo.com>
Signed-off-by: Djamel Touati (otd) <otd@odoo.com>
Before this commit, Barcode was not displayed on template
when related product variant is archived.
Here we are making sure that even when a product is
archived, its barcode is still visible in template.
closesodoo/odoo#89363
X-original-commit: f0c7cde3938c01df5fc10bb8dcd72fd3bb18afdb
Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com>
This commit adds an higher flexibility to pass optional args through the
price computation methods.
Those optional kwargs offer the opportunity to tune the price
computation, especially to tune the price_compute method on
ProductProduct and ProductTemplate.
On sale order line models, one can define some fields that should be
passed to the price_compute method in order to tune it.
task-2382027
Co-authored-by: Victor Feyens <vfe@odoo.com>
Preksha Chouhan