[8.0][FIX] Wizard to generate the project

[kl-adonze]

[fix Move when button to generate the project appears. It should get displayed when the stage is set to Stakeholder approval (rename to Approved by Stakeholders)

[oca-clabot]

Hey @khalidoss, thank you for your Pull Request.

It looks like some users haven't signed our Contributor License Agreement, yet.
You can read and sign our full Contributor License Agreement here: http://odoo-community.org/page/website.cla
Here is a list of the users:

• Khalid LAKHSAM (no github login found)

Appreciation of efforts,
OCA CLAbot

[elicoidal]

👍
@pedrobaeza @mmalorni @astirpe

[pedrobaeza]

Please check CLA and Travis status

[elicoidal]

@khalidoss can you check the status for travis?
Did you sign the CLA?

[kl-adonze]

@elicoidal I signed the CLA in the OCA sprint
I'm so busy this week. I will check the travis this weekend

[elicoidal]

OK thanks!

[elicoidal]

@khalidoss I hope you are fine: any news on this PR?

[victormmtorres]

@elicoidal @khalidoss

Please note that UT is failing as Travis said:

Here is just a Trace:

2017-02-24 07:34:12,599 5370 ERROR openerp_test openerp.addons.business_requirement_deliverable_project.tests.test_br: ` File "/home/travis/build/OCA/business-requirement/business_requirement_deliverable_project/tests/test_br.py", line 155, in test_wizard_apply

2017-02-24 07:34:12,599 5370 ERROR openerp_test openerp.addons.business_requirement_deliverable_project.tests.test_br: ` action = self.brA.generate_project_wizard()

2017-02-24 07:34:12,599 5370 ERROR openerp_test openerp.addons.business_requirement_deliverable_project.tests.test_br: ` AttributeError: 'business.requirement' object has no attribute 'generate_project_wizard'

[elicoidal]

@victormartinelicocorp can you fix it?

[elicoidal]

@victormartinelicocorp @sudhir-serpentcs can you check this PR, fix conflict and travis?

[sudhir-serpentcs]

@elicoidal Fixed the conflicts.

[elicoidal]

@sudhir-serpentcs Travis still needs some love

[sudhir-serpentcs]

Yeah, test cases failed. We will check and make them working.
@elicoidal

[sudhir-serpentcs]

@elicoidal I have fixed the previous error "generate_project_wizard not found for business.requirement model". Now, its throwing some exception from the code.
Can you please guide me should I just change the states of all the BRs in UT?

[victormmtorres]

@sudhir-serpentcs Have a look on this piece of code:
`

•    for br in br_ids:
        if br.state not in ['stakeholder_approved', 'cancel', 'done']:
            raise ValidationError(
                _("All business requirements of the project should "
                "be stakeholder_approved/canceled/done"))`
  

Means on the Test the BR should be on this states to not raise ValidationError or
if it's what you want then need to use assertRaises

cc @elicoidal

[victormmtorres]

@sudhir-serpentcs Looks good but the only thing I am not sure is the change from stakeholder_approval (legacy data) from stakeholder_approved (which I agree is better).
Issue is that it implies change of version with migration and migration script.
Given the modules are still WIP I think this is not yet a big deal and I am willing to take the risk for the sake of cleanness in future version.
@pedrobaeza @dreispt @jbeficent any opinion?

@sudhir-serpentcs not sure why but I think is not the main point of this PR.

Somehow the name of the states check on the function was not exactly the same as BR main module.

• if br.state not in ['stakeholder_approved', 'cancel', 'done']:
  continue

So I guess you think to fix it directly on main module business_requierement.

•        ('stakeholder_approval', 'Stakeholder Approval'),
  

•        ('stakeholder_approved', 'Approved by Stakeholder'),
  

IMO should be fix here on this module business_requirement_deliverable_project because others BR's modules with depends one way another on business_requirement could be impact and of course we need some data migration for BR module.

[elicoidal]

@victormartinelicocorp agree with your solution. We will plan for a migration later on as this is not relevant today
@sudhir-serpentcs

[elicoidal]

@sudhir-serpentcs can you update the status here so that we can merge?

[sudhir-serpentcs]

@elicoidal I already have made changes as per the review. I don't have anything to update / push.

[elicoidal]

@sudhir-serpentcs We should not change the stages name which is currently what you do in this PR.
Let me know if unclear

[sudhir-serpentcs]

@elicoidal If you check the commit history, you will see that I just fixed the conflicts. The stages name were already changed in this PR.
Let me know if you want me to change the stage name as they were before.

[elicoidal]

vLet me know if you want me to change the stage name as they were before.

Yes please. I do not want to trigger a migration for this version. We will do it for v10 as there s currently no code created.

[elicoidal]

@sudhir-serpentcs let me know when we can move forward

[sudhir-serpentcs]

@elicoidal Please review.

[elicoidal]

@victormartinelicocorp can you have a look on the tests?

[victormmtorres]

@victormartinelicocorp can you have a look on the tests?

Do you mean the UT? LGTM

[elicoidal]

OK

[elicoidal]

@dreispt @astirpe can you have a look so that we move forward this one?