12.0 mig product tags #434
Conversation
hegenator
force-pushed
the
12.0-mig-product-tags
branch
from
9dba4f8
to
ff8a46f
Compare
hegenator
force-pushed
the
12.0-mig-product-tags
branch
from
ff8a46f
to
c6b4e71
Compare
| tag_ids = fields.Many2many( | ||
| comodel_name='product.template.tag', string="Product Tags", | ||
| relation='product_template_product_tag_rel', | ||
| column1='product_tmpl_id', column2='tag_id') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason for giving the relation, column1 and column2 arguments? As I understand they will be automatically set.
| _description = 'Product Tag' | ||
|
|
||
| name = fields.Char(string="Name", required=True, translate=True) | ||
| color = fields.Integer(string="Color Index") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There needs to be a constraint here since the colours that can be shown have specific numbers. Or maybe it could be a selection field?
| product_tmpl_ids = fields.Many2many( | ||
| comodel_name='product.template', string="Products", | ||
| relation='product_template_product_tag_rel', | ||
| column1='tag_id', column2='product_tmpl_id') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here, do you need the relation, column1, and column2 attributes to be set explicitly?
| string="# of Products", compute='_compute_products_count', store=True) | ||
| company_id = fields.Many2one( | ||
| comodel_name='res.company', string="Company", | ||
| default=lambda self: self._default_company()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe this could be default= lambda self: self.env.user.company_id so that you could avoid defining a function.
| @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ | |||
| from odoo.tests import common | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe here (and in some init files, you maybe want your copyright plus the licence comment (actually I think on the init files only the licence)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And maybe some tests trying to create tags with users from different companies, and tag colour testing
| <field name="arch" type="xml"> | ||
|
|
||
| <field name="categ_id" position="after"> | ||
| <field name="tag_ids"/> |
| <field name="company_id"/> | ||
| <group expand="0"> | ||
| <filter name="group_by_company" string="Company" | ||
| domain="[]" context="{'group_by': 'company_id'}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the domain can be omitted.
| <field name="arch" type="xml"> | ||
| <tree> | ||
| <field name="name"/> | ||
| <field name="company_id" widget="selection" groups="base.group_multi_company"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we need a widget selection on a non editable list view?
| <field name="name">product.template.tag.form (in product_template_tags)</field> | ||
| <field name="model">product.template.tag</field> | ||
| <field name="arch" type="xml"> | ||
| <form> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As I understand it, we want the user to be able to set tags/colours for products per company. If that is true, then there should be the colour field here, and the user should not be able to add their own tags/colours from the product form. Also, the rights should be different (group_user should be able to only read, and possibly only some stock managers be able to create/write/unlink)
| <field name="view_type">form</field> | ||
| </record> | ||
|
|
||
| <record model="ir.ui.menu" id="product_template_tag_config_menu"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe this would make more sense under Stock -> Products -> Configuration? But of course then you would need stock. Would it be a bad idea to set it as a dependency? Probably. Might as well keep the menu here, still it seems a little bit out of place.
|
Please close this PR because it is already migrated in #448 |
|
Closing the PR since it has already been migrated elsewhere. |
Migration of
product_template_tagsfrom 10.0 to 12.0