Skip to content
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

[16.0][ADD] add rma_reason & sale_rma_reason #409

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: 16.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sbejaoui
Copy link
Contributor

@sbejaoui sbejaoui commented Jul 15, 2024

Specifying the RMA reason when creating an RMA order is crucial for effective inventory management, quality control, and customer service. It helps categorize returned items accurately, identify recurring product issues, and improve overall product quality. This data enables customer service to address issues more effectively and enhances the customer experience.

This addon allows RMA managers to pre-configure possible reasons users can specify when creating the RMA order.

fixes #405

needs: #410

cc/ @jbaudoux , @lmignon , @rousseldenis

image

image

@sbejaoui sbejaoui force-pushed the 16.0-rma_reason-sbj branch 2 times, most recently from 429d797 to 0ddd67f Compare July 15, 2024 19:27
rma_reason/models/rma_reason.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@rousseldenis rousseldenis added this to the 16.0 milestone Jul 17, 2024
@rousseldenis rousseldenis linked an issue Jul 17, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
5 tasks
Copy link
Contributor

@rousseldenis rousseldenis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Apart the @lmignon remark, it should be great to add it to portal template too:

image

Thanks

@sbejaoui sbejaoui force-pushed the 16.0-rma_reason-sbj branch 2 times, most recently from b361a86 to 324b5a8 Compare July 17, 2024 18:49
@sbejaoui sbejaoui force-pushed the 16.0-rma_reason-sbj branch 3 times, most recently from 3223b9c to 18c0169 Compare July 18, 2024 07:03
Specifying the RMA reason when creating an RMA order is crucial for effective inventory management, quality control, and customer service. It helps categorize returned items accurately, identify recurring product issues, and improve overall product quality. This data enables customer service to address issues more effectively and enhances the customer experience.

This addon allows RMA managers to pre-configure possible reasons users can specify when creating the RMA order.
@sbejaoui sbejaoui force-pushed the 16.0-rma_reason-sbj branch 6 times, most recently from b32941b to 7886fb6 Compare July 18, 2024 13:05
@sbejaoui sbejaoui changed the title [16.0][ADD] add rma_reason [16.0][ADD] add rma_reason & sale_rma_reason Jul 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@rousseldenis rousseldenis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

"name": "Rma Reason",
"version": "16.0.1.0.0",
"license": "AGPL-3",
"author": "Raumschmiede GmbH,BCIM,ACSONE SA/NV,Odoo Community Association (OCA)",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think Raumschmiede GmbH should go in the CREDITS file, not as author, being the paying customer, isn't it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jbaudoux , fine with you?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

They are the original author of the module, not the paying customer of this OCA port

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But you should not add them at the top of the file that were not there originally.

<th class="text-start">Requested operation</th>
<th
class="text-start"
name="operation"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And you can take the occasion to name all the elements.

Suggested change
name="operation"
name="th_operation"

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is it really needed? As in the xpath, we must already specify the node

<xpath expr="//th[@name='operation']" position="before">

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Adding the same name several times is not a good practice IMO. It's true that selectors are done usually with the HTML tag, but to get an absolute element, better with unique names.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You are right @pedrobaeza in the case of the id element attribute since this one is expected to be unique across the full dom. But for the name, it seems to me to be redundant.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, it's not critical.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would say it should be at developer's discretion as both approaches provide a unique way of xpath anchor.

@@ -147,7 +150,7 @@
t-att-value="data['picking'] and data['picking'].id"
/>
</td>
<td class="text-start">
<td class="text-start" name="operation">
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
<td class="text-start" name="operation">
<td class="text-start" name="td_operation">

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

@sbejaoui sbejaoui force-pushed the 16.0-rma_reason-sbj branch 4 times, most recently from 94908ba to b0f2031 Compare July 22, 2024 08:53
@jbaudoux
Copy link

cc @raumschmiede-joshuaL

Copy link

@jbaudoux jbaudoux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LG, not tested yet

@jbaudoux
Copy link

jbaudoux commented Aug 2, 2024

@sbejaoui I would prefer to have the reason before the operation on the wizard as, in my opinion, it makes more sense to first choose a reason and then an operation. Some operations may not be valid for some reason

Copy link

@jbaudoux jbaudoux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you add the reason also in the stock picking return ? Like you did on SO wizard.
You can also create RMAs from there

@sbejaoui
Copy link
Contributor Author

Can you add the reason also in the stock picking return ? Like you did on SO wizard. You can also create RMAs from there

Can you add the reason also in the stock picking return ? Like you did on SO wizard. You can also create RMAs from there

done

image

rma_reason/wizards/stock_return_picking.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rma_sale_reason/wizards/sale_order_rma_wizard.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rma_sale_reason/wizards/sale_order_rma_wizard.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
[IMP] rma_reason: add rma reason to stock return wizard
@sbejaoui sbejaoui requested a review from jbaudoux August 19, 2024 07:19
@sbejaoui
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jbaudoux , can you plz update your review

Copy link

@jbaudoux jbaudoux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested, looks good

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RMA reason
6 participants