[IMP] hr_holidays: restrict allocation type to leave type #158067
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
Bertrand2
force-pushed
the
master-allocation-type-bedo
branch
from
4e7456b
to
baf5479
Compare
Bertrand2
force-pushed
the
master-allocation-type-bedo
branch
2 times, most recently
from
093dfd2
to
8974caf
Compare
Bertrand2
force-pushed
the
master-allocation-type-bedo
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9246dd7
to
5a91dbb
Compare
Comment on lines
351
to
366
| raise ValidationError(_( | ||
| "Fields modification is limited for leave types linked to at least one allocation or leave." | ||
| )) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This error message could be more descriptive. I would add in which of the fields that are being modified are problematic
Comment on lines
356
to
372
| raise ValidationError(_( | ||
| "The modification you're trying to do to negative amounts will bring some discrepancies to some employees." | ||
| )) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also this error message is a little hard to read to me. Does this mean that the changes being done result in some employees being further in negative than they are allowed to be?
| @@ -320,6 +321,43 @@ def _search(self, domain, offset=0, limit=None, order=None, access_rights_uid=No | |||
| return leaves._as_query() | |||
| return super()._search(domain, offset, limit, order, access_rights_uid) | |||
|
|
|||
| def _has_discrepancies(self, employees, target_date=None): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you make this method name more descriptive? This method checks whether an employee has taken more negative time off than is allowed right? Maybe just _check_negative_time_off and raise the error in this method, instead of returning a boolean?
Bertrand2
force-pushed
the
master-allocation-type-bedo
branch
2 times, most recently
from
eaa64d7
to
b228ef8
Compare
Bertrand2
force-pushed
the
master-allocation-type-bedo
branch
from
b228ef8
to
2e1cbfd
Compare
Before this commit, the allocation type determining if the allocation is regular or linked to an accrual was chosen from the allocation directly. This means that for a same leave type, both allocation type could have been used. However, as both are very different in the way we compute the remaining leaves (for the time off dashboard for example) this might lead to some display issues. This commit moves the allocation type selection to the leave type, ensuring only one type can be used instead. This commit also removed the unused field "accruals_ids". Finally, this commit set a constraint on the fields `requires_allocation` and `allocation_type` to avoid modifying them once either some leaves or some allocations have been set for that leave type. The negative amount settings modification is also limited to ensure that the new amount set is not bringing discrepancies into the database. task-3412869
Bertrand2
force-pushed
the
master-allocation-type-bedo
branch
from
2e1cbfd
to
f07d33b
Compare
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.
Before this commit, the allocation type determining if the allocation is regular or linked to an accrual was chosen from the allocation directly. This means that for a same leave type, both allocation type could have been used. However, as both are very different in the way we compute the remaining leaves (for the time off dashboard for example) this might lead to some display issues.
This commit moves the allocation type selection to the leave type, ensuring only one type can be used instead.
task-3412869