[MIG] Migrate mis_builder, mis_builder_budget, mis_builder_demo to 16.0

[adrienpeiffer]

TODO :

• port [15.0] fix permission issues when running as non-admin user #416
• port [PORT][15.0][FIX] mis_builder: bug unable to add SUM COL at once #474
• port [15.0] Fix display of analytic tags in PDF and Excel reports #481 analytic tags are gone
• port [15.0][PORT] 483 from 14.0 #484
• Integrate analytic Apocalypse
• Integrate account type rework (odoo/odoo@26b2472)
• Migrate JS to OWL 2.0 ?
• Functional testing

Depens on :

• [16.0] [MIG] date_range server-ux#535
• [16.0][MIG] report_xlsx: Migration to 16.0 reporting-engine#690

[adrienpeiffer]

odoo/odoo#101701

[sbidoul]

/ocabot migration mis_builder

[OCA-git-bot]

There's no issue in this repo with the title 'Migration to version 16.0' and the milestone 16.0, so not possible to add the comment.

[sbidoul]

/ocabot migration mis_builder

[FernandoRomera]

@adrienpeiffer
Merged:
OCA/server-ux#535
OCA/reporting-engine#690

Can you rebase, please?

[ovnicraft]

@adrienpeiffer any news about this? I would like to know if more hands are needed here.

[sbidoul]

I had a quick look at this.

The PDF and XLSX exports work.

There are a few UX issues (default company, preview/export buttons on the report form are not visible).

The preview widget does not work. Does it need to be rewritten in OWL?

The analytic filters... well I don't immediately see how we could implement them in 16.0.
When using the journal items as data source, we can't do much filtering with the analytic distribution json field.
Maybe we could promote analytic lines as an official data source (like in mis_builder_analytic), and enable analytic filters only when that data source is selected? Not sure. Suggestions welcome.

[dzungtran89]

hi @sbidoul , about the widget mis_report_widget, it needs to be migrated to owl in order to work with odoo 16, so I think we can do step by step:

• Migrate the widget to owl to make the preview work at least -> I'll do this
• About the filter, for the moment I can add the filter of analytic lines m2m

[sbidoul]

Migrate the widget to owl to make the preview work at least -> I'll do this

Thanks! Please do a PR to acsone:16.0-mig-mis_builder-ape

About the filter, for the moment I can add the filter of analytic lines m2m

I'm not sure how that would work?

[dzungtran89]

I'm not sure how that would work?

I think, because the analytic lines link to the move_line_id (m2o), so with this filter, we could get relevant move lines for the report

[sbidoul]

Hm, yes, but I'm afraid that will not work performance-wise.

[rafaelbn]

Hello! Thank you! 😄

Could you please rebase to check and test?

Thank you!

[sbidoul]

@rafaelbn there is nothing to rebase. runboat is usable.

[sbidoul]

A few more thoughts about analytic filters.

I'm going to removing everything that concerns analytic tags and analytic groups. These concepts are gone for good.

The remaining analytic filters would be analytic account and analytic plan. Selecting an analytic plan would be mandatory when filtering on analytic accounts.

Maybe we can make the analytic filters visible only if analytic_account_id and analytic_plan_id are present in the move line source.

I'm still wondering what the analytic plan hierarchy is good for...

[sbidoul]

@dzungtran89 little steps that can be done:

• a PR with one commit to remove code related to analytic tags (across all 3 modules)
• a PR with the forward ports mentioned in the original description (across all 3 modules)
• a PR with a SQL view model that emulates account.move.line based on the analytic lines with at least an additional column for the analytic plan

[rafaelbn]

Hello @sbidoul ,

I'm going to removing everything that concerns analytic tags and analytic groups. These concepts are gone for good.

For a migration from 15 to 16:

• To which object analytic tags will be migrated in order to maintain all reports working? Actually tags were dimension , important information for clients.
• To which object analytic groups will be migrated in order to maintain all report working? Less important but exists.

Do you have an idea actually or we have still to analyse?

I'm worried about transition. Let me know any help. I will try to record a analysis.

Thank you!

[sbidoul]

Hi @rafaelbn if you have information about how the analytic concepts are migrated from 15 to 16 that would help. I very much doubt we can migrate reports that rely on analytic automatically, though.

[dzungtran89]

Hi @sbidoul , thanks for your suggestions. The below are two forward ports

• [16.0][FWD] mis_builder_budget: Forward updates from 15.0 #492
• [16.0][FWD] mis_builder: Forward updates from 15.0 #493

The reason of having two PRs is to avoid mixing up the commit history of two modules mis_builder and mis_builder_widget

[pedrobaeza]

I let @sbidoul the honor of merging when he's ready.

[sbidoul]

Let's wait until mid next week to let people test?

[pedrobaeza]

OK for me.

[etobella]

Functional test locally and it worked like a charm!

[sbidoul]

There is probably a bug when changing the move line source in a report template after reports have been created for it. I'll look into it.

[sbidoul]

Is there a way to warn users about analytic account not being an option anymore? I think it would avoid some possible bug reports.

ValueError: Invalid field account.move.line.analytic_account_id in leaf ('analytic_account_id.code', '=', '03000')

More broadly it would be good to show a nicer error message is such case [invalid domain]. This can happen for many reasons. I created #557 to track this.

[sbidoul]

@CasVissers-360ERP a friendlier error message is now provided when invalid fields are used in expressions or filter domains. Let me know how it works for you.

[sbidoul]

Since the widget is getting a life of its own (thanks OWL for enabling this!), I refactored it's configuration a little bit and moved it to its own tab in the report configuration form.

[CasVissers-360ERP]

Functional review:

1. I love the filtering widget and the option to choose a custom search view. Thanks a lot.
2. The help view for KPI's looks a bit weird (nice2have)

3. Thanks for the error handling with incorrect domains. Hopefully saves some future inefficiencies.

Now on the analytic filtering:

I think I'll wait before doing the analytic extension modules I mentioned in #472 (comment) until I have a clearer view of the use cases.

Not sure if this is what you mean but our use-case:
A P&L split by business line, for business lines analytic accounts are used. We need to filter in the P&L using analytic accounts. Currently we do this on KPI's using the analytic account filter.

I was thinking odoo/odoo#116496 might help here, what if we added a filter option on KPI's: "Filter Analytic Accounts" a m2m to account.analytic.account.

When computing amounts, if analytic distribution is set and available on the model, search analytic distributions to find if the analytic account is used. If this is the case we look at the distribution and correct the amount. I know it can be performance heavy, but this is something we can mention in the view? "Using analytic accounts in KPI's might have an impact on performance". Future ideas/changes might fix the performance?

---

Anyhow from my side no blocking issues to merge this PR. Thanks

[sbidoul]

@CasVissers-360ERP I fixed the help page. Thanks for the testing.

I'm following odoo/odoo#116496 too. It would definitely help, in situations where each move line is allocated 100% in exactly one analytic account per plan. With proper indexing it may even be performant. I hope they land it.

For analytic distributions the only solution I see is a move-line-like SQL view on analytic lines.

[sbidoul]

Let's go :)

/ocabot merge patch

[OCA-git-bot]

What a great day to merge this nice PR. Let's do it!
Prepared branch 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-472-by-sbidoul-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[OCA-git-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at f577b3f. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️