Skip to content

[MIG] stock_orderpoint_route: Migration to 18.0 #33

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: 18.0
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[MIG] stock_orderpoint_route: Migration to 18.0 #33

wants to merge 11 commits into from

Conversation

@grindtildeath
Copy link
Contributor

@grindtildeath grindtildeath commented Feb 6, 2025

No description provided.

JordiBForgeFlow and others added 11 commits February 6, 2025 18:38
@JordiBForgeFlow @grindtildeath
stock_orderpoint_route
af9cb22
@guewen @grindtildeath
Migrate stock_orderpoint_route to 12.0
30aa2de
@guewen @grindtildeath
stock_orderpoint_route: Migration to 13.0
1513689 
Improve code after reviews

* performance (less queries executed)
* disable tracking in tests (faster)
* use with_user instead of sudo
* the double for loop in _compute_route_ids actually generates one more
  query as the simple one in this commit (thanks to the cache)
* extract a method
* the parent locations can be found using 'parent_of' which will use the
  parent_path under the hood (example: 1/7/8 will return locations 1, 7,
  8)
@MiquelRForgeFlow @grindtildeath
Eficent -> ForgeFlow
c9d9c44
@dzungtran89 @grindtildeath
stock_orderpoint_route: Migration to 14.0
aebca39
@hailangvn @grindtildeath
stock_orderpoint_route: avoid missing route_ids field issue
7a98644 
This is to avoid issue below for any module that inherits tree view of
the model `stock.warehouse.orderpoint`. Example: `stock_orderpoint_manual_procurement`

Field route_ids used in field route_id default domain
([('id', 'in', route_ids)]) must be present in view but is missing.
@sebalix @grindtildeath
stock_orderpoint_route: avoid missing route_ids field issue (bis)
96fa73b 
Complete the fix done in 06dfeedc66
@mymage @grindtildeath
Added translation using Weblate (Italian)
a27fb94
@PicchiSeba @grindtildeath
stock_orderpoint_route: Migration to 16.0
89d76cb
@grindtildeath
[IMP] stock_orderpoint_route: pre-commit auto fixes
68cdca6
@grindtildeath
[MIG] stock_orderpoint_route: Migration to 18.0
ddd4c89
@grindtildeath grindtildeath force-pushed the 18.0-mig-stock_orderpoint_route branch from 88b35ce to ddd4c89 Compare February 6, 2025 17:56
@grindtildeath
Copy link
Contributor Author

grindtildeath commented Feb 6, 2025

This one will need fixing because IMO the condition to filter routes in _get_location_routes_of_parents is not correct for following reasons:

  • In v18.0, multi step reception route is excluded because its rule doesn't use an internal source location
  • Even in v16.0, using a single step reception route, it is excluded because its single rule doesn't use an internal source location
  • The delivery route should not be selectable from the orderpoint as triggering the procurement with this route selected will not generate anything

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 8, 2025

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 8, 2025
@giarve
Copy link

giarve commented Jun 11, 2025

This one will need fixing because IMO the condition to filter routes in _get_location_routes_of_parents is not correct for following reasons:

* In v18.0, multi step reception route is excluded because its rule doesn't use an internal source location

* Even in v16.0, using a single step reception route, it is excluded because its single rule doesn't use an internal source location

* The delivery route should not be selectable from the orderpoint as triggering the procurement with this route selected will not generate anything

Check this out:

#42

marcelsavegnago
marcelsavegnago approved these changes Jun 11, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@marcelsavegnago marcelsavegnago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Jun 15, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Oct 19, 2025

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 19, 2025
@marcelsavegnago
Copy link
Member

marcelsavegnago commented Oct 20, 2025

@grindtildeath can you rebase?

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Oct 26, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

2 more reviewers

@ivantodorovich ivantodorovich ivantodorovich approved these changes

@marcelsavegnago marcelsavegnago marcelsavegnago approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

approved

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.