[10.0] mig bank statement import coda from 8.0 #54
Conversation
The module is a rewrite of l10n_be_coda using the pycoda parser.
Use the Structured Communication as name else use the communication if it's provided else use '/'. If the line is a details line use the communication from the related globalisation as name. The module now depends of l10n_be_coda since the first one is automatically installed when installing l10n_be. The menuitem 'Import Coda File' from l10n_be_coda is however removed to avoid confusion and force the use of the current module
…ote of statement line with the same transaction_ref
The declaration prevents the install of the module if the dependency is not met
…ty constraint with the demo data of l10n_be_coda.
this makes the test more robust (the previous version did not work in presence of account_constraints, and could not be run twice in a row on the same database)
sbidoul
force-pushed
the
10.0-mig-bank_statement_import_coda
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d92bd46
to
33d9dd3
Compare
sbidoul
force-pushed
the
10.0-mig-bank_statement_import_coda
branch
from
33d9dd3
to
22d285d
Compare
|
@Olivier-LAURENT have you had a chance to test this? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sbidoul I've just two small remarks which will be great for us to be adressed. Otherwise it could be merged.
| if statements: | ||
| acc_number = statements[0].acc_number | ||
| currency = statement.currency | ||
| return currency, acc_number, vals_bank_statements |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in our version we return return currency, self._get_acc_number(account_number), vals_bank_statements
this _get_acc_number function ensure that we have a defined journal for this account number.
def _get_acc_number(self, acc_number):
#Check if we match the exact acc_number or the end of an acc number
journal = self.env['account.journal'].search([('bank_acc_number', '=like', '%' + acc_number)])
if not journal or len(journal) > 1: #if not found or ambiguious
return acc_number
return journal.bank_acc_number
| if statement.new_balance_amount_sign == AmountSign.DEBIT: | ||
| balance_end_real = - balance_end_real | ||
| transactions = [] | ||
| statement_date = statement.new_balance_date |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not using statement.creation_date?
|
Tested NOT OK with Triodos bank. It seems that the unique reference construction should be improved. See houssine's feedback for the technical details. |
| 'partner_name': line.counterparty_name or None, | ||
| 'account_number': line.counterparty_number or None, | ||
| 'note': self.get_st_line_note(line, information_dict), | ||
| 'unique_import_id': line.ref + line.transaction_ref, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we get a problem here testing it with Triodos Coda.
the uniqe_import_id is too weak and led to ignore statement and or statement line import.
in our implementation we build the uniqe_import_id like this statement.coda_seq_number + '-' + statement.old_balance_date + '-' + statement.new_balance_date + '-' + move.ref
we also found that trasanction_ref returned from pycoda is in fact the bank reference from which the payment as been made. This reference is not mandatory and can be empty(N° de référence de la banque. Cette information est strictement informative)
|
@sbidoul Hello Stéphane. Is there any news regarding our test results on this PR? |
|
@sbidoul Hi Stéphane, |
|
@vdewulf I've backported the most changes from v11. Let's see if it's green. /ocabot merge |
|
What a great day to merge this nice PR. Let's do it! |
|
Congratulations, your PR was merged at 655de5c. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️ PS: Don't worry if GitHub says there are unmerged commits: it is due to a rebase before merge. All commits of this PR have been merged into |
|
thanks @sbidoul |
No description provided.