[FW]Various documentation fixes resulting from onboarding #57580
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
robodoo
added
conflict
|
Ping @raf-odoo, @Feyensv stderr: Either perform the forward-port manually (and push to this branch, proceeding as usual) or close this PR (maybe?). In the former case, you may want to edit this PR message as well. |
robodoo
added
CI 🤖
raf-odoo
force-pushed
the
saas-11.3-11.0-doc-fixes-raf-q5Fg-fw
branch
from
3ca688b
to
76da47d
Compare
robodoo
added
☐ ci/runbot
and removed
CI 🤖
|
@robodoo r+ |
Added an example because it's non-trivial to realize why you would want to set `mode` to `primary` together with `inherit_id`. Another way to look at it is that the view matching doesn't understand delegation inheritance. If it did there would be no need to override `mode` because it would be able to see that the parent and derived views refer to related models. But since that feature might not be worth the effort, it's ok for me to just document the current situation.
The behavior isn't exactly undefined: it will appear to work if the relation refers to only 1 instance. If there are multiple it will give results for 1 instance and ignore the others. This behavior should not be relied upon, hence I'm documenting it as undefined. I confirmed this with mat from the ORM team. Even better would be to raise an error or warning if `related` is used in this context. Co-authored-by: Raf Geens <raf@odoo.com>
raf-odoo
force-pushed
the
saas-11.3-11.0-doc-fixes-raf-q5Fg-fw
branch
from
76da47d
to
d01b29a
Compare
robodoo
added
☐ ci/runbot
and removed
CI 🤖
|
@robodoo r+ |
robodoo
added
r+ 👌
CI 🤖
|
Because this PR has multiple commits, I need to know how to merge it:
|
|
@robodoo rebase-ff |
robodoo
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 14, 2020
The behavior isn't exactly undefined: it will appear to work if the relation refers to only 1 instance. If there are multiple it will give results for 1 instance and ignore the others. This behavior should not be relied upon, hence I'm documenting it as undefined. I confirmed this with mat from the ORM team. Even better would be to raise an error or warning if `related` is used in this context. closes #57580 Signed-off-by: Victor Feyens (vfe) <vfe@odoo.com> Signed-off-by: Raf Geens <raf-odoo@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Raf Geens <raf@odoo.com>
|
Merge method set to rebase and fast-forward |
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.
See the commit messages for detailed descriptions of the different issues.
Removing the link to the Javascript API document results in a warning when building because it doesn't have a parent anymore. But I'm ok with that, since I hope that the underlying compatibility issue will be fixed one day and the link can be restored. And it serves as a reminder that something is broken.
I created a
staticfolder for the truncated csv file included in the documentation. Let me know if a different location is more appropriate.I expect there might be a merge conflict in 13.0 regarding the
inherit_idandmodefields, because that section of the documentation was restructured there.Here's an example of the bullet list formatting issues:
Forward-Port-Of: #57270