-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
temporary PR for framework_agreement_sourcing + logistic_requisition #13
Closed
lepistone
wants to merge
64
commits into
OCA:8.0
from
lepistone:agreement_sourcing+logistic_requisition
Closed
temporary PR for framework_agreement_sourcing + logistic_requisition #13
lepistone
wants to merge
64
commits into
OCA:8.0
from
lepistone:agreement_sourcing+logistic_requisition
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
… procurement anymore and drop shipping automatically validates it's procurement
…ion_bid_selection
…ping and need procurement groups are doing the job of spliting sale order into multiple procurement
…emented in base sale.py
set cost estimate lines to manually sourced and ensure user has set a po line
This is to be consistent with a last-minute change in odoo 8 that made the date of a purchase order a datetime field.
and add an onchange on consignee to set it
Specifically, the field logistic_requisition_source_id is not there anymore.
* use the correct API version in the wizard: the code would use self.pool.get which returns an old-API model and then use it through the new API * add a yaml test for this sourcing flow (long because we need to manually process the whole PR) * fix various isssues with new API use: - cannot write on a recorset with > 1 records - confusions with bits expecting records / ids
It does not seem to make much difference from the original one in logistic_requisition.
The agreement field should already have a domain: no need to check with an onchange that a consistent choice is made.
the code would use self.pool.get which returns an old-API model and then use it through the new API
…ing+logistic_requisition
…tic_requisition Conflicts: .travis.yml
523a6bb
to
44dd69c
Compare
Now #8 has been merged, no more need for that one. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a temporary PR to test this two unmerged modules together.
Please do not merge this one.
Thanks!