Skip to content

Conversation

@carlosdauden
Copy link
Contributor

@Tecnativa TT49436

if (
p_shipping_bank_id
and not self.partner_bank_id
and self.payment_mode_id.payment_method_id.code == "sepa_direct_debit"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that for decoupling this module from SEPA DD, we should:

Suggested change
and self.payment_mode_id.payment_method_id.code == "sepa_direct_debit"
and not self.payment_mode_id.show_bank_account_from_journal

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this change, what will happen when a contact has a specific mandate and an invoice is printed where, exceptionally, payment by transfer has been established?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is the problem with the existing code?
Establishing a bank mandate at the contact level cannot be too decoupled from SEPA DD.

Copy link
Member

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza Jun 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Without having installed account_banking_sepa_direct_debit, this patch won't work, so that's the coupling.

I see that the same coupling is right now on account_payment_partner:

self.payment_mode_id.payment_method_id.code == "sepa_direct_debit"

and this was highlighted already in this comment: #1219 (comment)

I think it's the duty of the user to configure correctly the payment mode to show or not customer bank accounts. It's not like how they are forced to show it. Users have the control over this.

What do you think about changing this in both parts with a migration script setting to not show the bank account if it's set that way but not sepa_direct_debit? Do you want me to do it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, do what you think, I just want the client to see what he expects.

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

@github-actions
Copy link

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Oct 13, 2024
@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza removed the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Oct 16, 2024
@github-actions
Copy link

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Feb 16, 2025
@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza removed the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Feb 24, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Jun 29, 2025
@CarlosRoca13 CarlosRoca13 force-pushed the 15.0-IMP-account_banking_mandate_contact-show_contact_account_bank branch from 59b2e18 to 4e39412 Compare July 21, 2025 07:16
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Jul 27, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants