[18.0][MIG] sale_delivery_state #3395
Conversation
Make it optional to work with module `delivery` without adding it as a dependency
Co-authored-by: Simone Orsi <simahawk@users.noreply.github.com>
Currently translated at 100.0% (9 of 9 strings) Translation: sale-workflow-17.0/sale-workflow-17.0-sale_delivery_state Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/sale-workflow-17-0/sale-workflow-17-0-sale_delivery_state/it/
|
As a note,#3349 will need forward porting to 18.0. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LG overall,
In addition to PR 3349 that the previous person suggested, you also need to pick #3020.
Additionally, I think we should have a migration for the sale_stock_delivery_state module. To avoid problems when sale_stock is installed.
| </field> | ||
| <group name="sale_shipping" position="inside"> | ||
| <field name="delivery_status" invisible="state != 'sale'" /> | ||
| <field name="force_delivery_state" invisible="1" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FYI, Since https://github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/137031 the invisible fields are add automatically (invisible and readonly) if they are used by python expressions in views (invisible, required, readonly, context, domain...).
| <field name="force_delivery_state" invisible="1" /> |
| <field | ||
| name="delivery_status" | ||
| widget="badge" | ||
| optional="hide" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why hiding? I thought it was a global recommendation in OCA to hide new fields in tree/list views to not clutter them. By default the std field is hidden too in sale_stock.
|
This PR has the |
|
/ocabot migration sale_delivery_state |
No description provided.