-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 249
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
[14.0][RFC] l10n_br_base: refactor vat field value #2718
Merged
OCA-git-bot
merged 5 commits into
OCA:14.0
from
Escodoo:14.0-rfc-l10n_br_base-refactor-vat-and-others
Dec 1, 2023
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
9d7a91e
[RFC] l10n_br_base: change inscr_est when partner is_company False an…
marcelsavegnago 45cec94
[RFC] l10n_br_base: refactor vat field and add br fields on create_co…
marcelsavegnago 82caf2e
[RFC] l10n_br_base: remove vat field replace from inherit view and ch…
marcelsavegnago 475dede
[IMP] l10n_br_base: add partner._compute_vat_from_cnpj_cpf tests
marcelsavegnago 83a82df
[IMP] l10n_br_base: add partner.create_company tests
marcelsavegnago File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
eu acho que tem que assignar o partner.vat de todos os partners para não ter erros de CacheMiss. Tb, como seria num caso internacional onde a empresa vai usar esse campo vat mesmo?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A principio ainda não trabalhei no caso de uso internacional e sim em uma forma de viabilizar o uso deste campo no método create_company
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Lendo o outro PR pelo o que entendi isso está afetando o cadastro de um novo res.partner pelo Portal l10n_br_portal, seria esse o único motivo para preencher o VAT nos casos do Brasil? Se existe essa necessidade talvez o melhor seja usar um onchange ao invés do compute para não afetar os casos internacionais, sobre o Portal parece que o melhor seria ter um campo CNPJ na visão para o usuário informa-lo e assim separar o CNPJ_CPF do contato do CNPJ da empresa ou isso não seria possível?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Se tiver um campo CPF separado talvez resolveria. E no caso de pessoa fisica sem parent_id ou company_name o vat e cnpj_cpf seria o CPF.
E sim, a mudança é por conta de cadastros oriundos do portal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rvalyi tentei garantir que o campo receba um valor em todos os casos massss não tenho certeza se da forma que fiz foi a melhor forma.