[MIG] [13.0] report_xml: Migrate to version 13.0

[Tatider]

• Migrate module
• Return described but missed fictional of XML validation
  against XSD Schema

[oca-clabot]

Hey @Tatider, 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/cla
Here is a list of the users:

• Jairo Llopis j.llopis@grupoesoc.es (no github login found)

Appreciation of efforts,
OCA CLAbot

[Tatider]

Linter failed, but I don't agree with suggested changes by next reasons:

• Some of them will make lines longer that 79 signs (such this one)
• Most of them suggest changes with out contain comma at the end of line (such this one)
• Some of them leads to bad readability of code (such this one)

I can make them as a separate commit which message will clear describe, that these are black required changes. But I really would like discuss them with someone. They don't look like good changes for me.

[etobella]

Few comments about what you made...

I think it is a good idea to add the schema, but I do not agree with the implementation.

[etobella]

Linter failed, but I don't agree with suggested changes by next reasons:

* Some of them will make lines longer that 79 signs ([such this one](https://travis-ci.org/OCA/reporting-engine/jobs/628743415#L401))

* Most of them suggest changes with out contain comma at the end of line ([such this one](https://travis-ci.org/OCA/reporting-engine/jobs/628743415#L461))

* Some of them leads to bad readability of code ([such this one](https://travis-ci.org/OCA/reporting-engine/jobs/628743415#L377))

I can make them as a separate commit which message will clear describe, that these are black required changes. But I really would like discuss them with someone. They don't look like good changes for me.

I understand your concerns, but OCA decided to use black in order to make cleaner code. I think you should follow the standard usage, and include this on your commit, as this is part of the standard now.

[Tatider]

Linter failed, but I don't agree with suggested changes by next reasons:

* Some of them will make lines longer that 79 signs ([such this one](https://travis-ci.org/OCA/reporting-engine/jobs/628743415#L401))

* Most of them suggest changes with out contain comma at the end of line ([such this one](https://travis-ci.org/OCA/reporting-engine/jobs/628743415#L461))

* Some of them leads to bad readability of code ([such this one](https://travis-ci.org/OCA/reporting-engine/jobs/628743415#L377))

I can make them as a separate commit which message will clear describe, that these are black required changes. But I really would like discuss them with someone. They don't look like good changes for me.

I understand your concerns, but OCA decided to use black in order to make cleaner code. I think you should follow the standard usage, and include this on your commit, as this is part of the standard now.

Yes, I understand that it's a part of a standard now, but if the main purpose of using black is make code cleaner, but it doesn't even follow the PEP8...

So:

1. I changed my code in such way, what I'm almost fine with it, but there were still 2 issues. And I made next step to fix them.
2. Version of black was updated to the last one, which is 19.10b0 instead of 19.3b0.

And now linters are fine, but build failed. I don't think my changes cause this problem (

[etobella]

Travis is green, some error was raised on OCB, but it has been fixed now.

[Tatider]

I should upgrade translations files. Old definition of translations for selection fields is deprecated now.

@etobella as I understand from here I can ignore problem with translations, can't I?

[Tardo]

👍 LGTM only non-blocking comments.

[pedrobaeza]

@etobella please validate the PR and do you agree with the new authorship?

[Tardo]

Any progress here?

[sergio-teruel]

@Tatider CAn you do a rebase to fix isort conficts?? Thanks

[Tatider]

@Tatider CAn you do a rebase to fix isort conficts?? Thanks

Done

[Tardo]

This PR need reviews

[OCA-git-bot]

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

[pedrobaeza]

/ocabot merge nobump

[OCA-git-bot]

On my way to merge this fine PR!
Prepared branch 13.0-ocabot-merge-pr-359-by-pedrobaeza-bump-nobump, awaiting test results.

[OCA-git-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at f96fea4. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️