Skip to content
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.

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

[FIX] [16.0] stock_move_line_expiration_date_required: Remove required from field definition #1501

Conversation

Shide
Copy link
Contributor

@Shide Shide commented Feb 7, 2024

Using the required on the field definition causes the database to set "not nullable" on expiry_date column on stock.move.line.

Moved the required to the views.

MT-4224 @moduon @yajo @EmilioPascual @rafaelbn please review

@Shide Shide force-pushed the 16.0-remove_required_from_field_definition-stock_move_line_expiration_date_required branch from b100c03 to e1a3d60 Compare February 7, 2024 12:55
@rafaelbn rafaelbn added this to the 16.0 milestone Feb 7, 2024
@Shide Shide force-pushed the 16.0-remove_required_from_field_definition-stock_move_line_expiration_date_required branch from e1a3d60 to 35d75d1 Compare February 9, 2024 10:28
@Shide Shide requested a review from yajo February 9, 2024 10:28
@Shide
Copy link
Contributor Author

Shide commented Feb 9, 2024

I think the ocabot merge will need to increment the verison of the module

Copy link

@fcvalgar fcvalgar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

…field definition

Using the required on the field definition causes the database to set "not nullable" on expiry_date column on stock.move.line.
Moved the required to the views.
@Shide Shide force-pushed the 16.0-remove_required_from_field_definition-stock_move_line_expiration_date_required branch from 35d75d1 to 335702d Compare February 9, 2024 14:29
Copy link
Member

@rafaelbn rafaelbn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Functionaly 👍🏼

I think we should wait for @yajo or @rousseldenis approval to merge, technical review, thanks

@@ -3,12 +3,15 @@
{
"name": "Stock Move Line Expiration Date Required",
"Summary": "Expiration date is required to enter manually on Move Lines.",
"version": "16.0.1.0.1",
"version": "16.0.1.0.2",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

suggestion(non-blocking): usually, you shouldn't use migration scripts in patch versions. That should indicate that the version bump should be major.

According to our guidelines, it'd be a major or minor bump.

Future-proofing the code, it's better to restrict migration scripts to major or minor versions too.

However, this one PR is a little bit crossing the line because it's really a bugfix. Thus, this is not required at this time IMHO. But at least there's some extra info for you to keep in mind for next times :)

@yajo
Copy link
Member

yajo commented Feb 9, 2024

/ocabot merge nobump

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry @yajo you are not allowed to merge.

To do so you must either have push permissions on the repository, or be a declared maintainer of all modified addons.

If you wish to adopt an addon and become it's maintainer, open a pull request to add your GitHub login to the maintainers key of its manifest.

@rousseldenis
Copy link
Contributor

/ocabot merge nobump

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Hey, thanks for contributing! Proceeding to merge this for you.
Prepared branch 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1501-by-rousseldenis-bump-nobump, awaiting test results.

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot merged commit 0a0401d into OCA:16.0 Feb 9, 2024
5 of 7 checks passed
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Congratulations, your PR was merged at bf4885f. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

@yajo yajo deleted the 16.0-remove_required_from_field_definition-stock_move_line_expiration_date_required branch February 9, 2024 15:15
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.

6 participants