[15.0][MIG] base_business_document_import

[tbanevicius]

Depends on

• [15.0][MIG] account_tax_unece community-data-files#122
• [15.0][MIG] uom_unece community-data-files#119
• [15.0][MIG] base_unece community-data-files#120

[tbanevicius]

@simahawk could you possibly review it? But I understood you already did but in different MR --> #492

[etobella]

Can you squash the last commits? You can do

git remote update
git rebase -i origin/13.0

and merge them using fixup or squash

[simahawk]

this should not be here

[tbanevicius]

@etobella @simahawk fixed it.

[etobella]

Just one last thing, can you rename the last two commits with the right name, [15.0-mig-base] shouldn't be there

[tbanevicius]

@etobella should be okey now.

[tbanevicius]

Hi @pedrobaeza . In old MR you've mentioned that this module should reflect on Odoo 15 core EDI. But are you sure? This module only contains helper methods for base document import.

[pedrobaeza]

My thoughts are that Odoo is able to do the same stuff without this, so I suppose they have their tooling for that, so let's reuse it.

[tbanevicius]

My thoughts are that Odoo is able to do the same stuff without this, so I suppose they have their tooling for that, so let's reuse it.

Thank you for your insight. Unfortunately I don't have time to do re-design anytime soon.

[simahawk]

I agree. We should start getting rid of such gigantic I-do-all-you-want models.
For starting, I found out that the PDF parsing is also duplicated in base_ubl.
I'm moving it out here #596 (please review if you have time).

While adding some more test cov I've found also that some modules are partially broken on v14 because of missing inheritance on this big model which from my POV it shouldn't be at all inherited. See #595.

Very likely many other methods can be simplified or re-organized (eg: smaller models by topic) or moved out.
For v15 we can simply deprecate calls.
Of course this requires a lot of time and knowledge of the whole impact on depending modules (which I definitely miss ATM).
But we should start from something at least... :)

A good starting point would be to add more test coverage so that we'll know (more likely) if something gets broken while refactoring.

Today I see:

base_business_document_import/tests/test_business_document_import.py .........                                                                                     [100%]

---------- coverage: platform linux, python 3.8.12-final-0 -----------
Name                                                               Stmts   Miss  Cover   Missing
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
base_business_document_import/__init__.py                              1      0   100%
base_business_document_import/models/__init__.py                       1      0   100%
base_business_document_import/models/business_document_import.py     575    246    57%   22-23, 46, 53, 61, 78, 91-102, 126-132, 134-145, 161-166, 173, 242, 244, 264, 268-271, 276, 291, 300, 350, 377, 379, 392, 396, 412, 450-501, 535, 537, 615, 617, 624, 639, 658, 677-689, 700, 723, 725, 734, 750-761, 787-788, 830, 832, 841, 916-1001, 1006-1022, 1044, 1050, 1052, 1077, 1089-1097, 1108-1122, 1134-1141, 1152-1167, 1183-1208, 1212-1239, 1245-1278, 1282-1299
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL                                                                577    246    57%

Which means we have plenty of work to do on this side.

@tbanevicius could you have a look at non tested lines and see if you can improve the situation?

[github-actions]

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.