[11.0][IMP] sale_order_type: Find sale order type based on the products of the sale order #770
Conversation
…cts of the sale order
|
@OCA/crm-sales-marketing-maintainers please check, I don't know if this is the correct way to forward port a change, any suggestion for improvement is appreciated |
| Rules can also be associated with sale order types. | ||
|
|
||
| Inside each rule, you can select any number of products and/or product categories. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Case 1
- 1 sale order with 2 product
- Each of that 2 products are in 2 different rules of 2 different sale_order_type
Product 1 -> Sale order type 1
Product 2 -> Sale order type 2
Sale Order TEST has product 1 + product 2
Which is the result?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi, thanks for your review!
As stated few lines below, the order types are inspected following the order of their sequence field, so:
0. Suppose Type 1 has sequence 1 and Type 2 has sequence 2;
- Type 1 is inspected: does this match the current order?
- Does any rule of type 1 match any product in the order?
*. Yes -> choose type 1 and exit
*. No -> go on - Does any rule of type 1 match any product category in the order?
*. (same as above)
- Does any rule of type 1 match any product in the order?
- Repeat step 1 for the following order types
At least this is the behavior I tried to describe in the README, if that is not clear enough I can add an example.
|
@OCA/crm-sales-marketing-maintainers can this be merged? Consider that this functionality is just forward ported from #716, thanks |
sale_order_type/models/sale_order.py
Outdated
| @@ -36,6 +36,23 @@ def onchange_type_id(self): | |||
| if order.type_id.incoterm_id: | |||
| order.incoterm = order.type_id.incoterm_id.id | |||
|
|
|||
| @api.multi | |||
| @api.onchange('order_line') | |||
| def _onchange_order_line(self): | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This onchange shouldn't be triggered automatically.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi, thanks for the review!
It is triggered automatically but it only does something if the type_id of the order is empty.
Are you suggesting it should depend on something else or should I remove it completely?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It should be removed IMO due to performance reasons.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok then I'll remove it, double-thinking about it, it might be confusing when:
- add first line -> type is set
- add second line, type should change but it doesn't
In the end, everyone would be clicking on the recompute button to be sure the type is correct..
… can be confusing and not efficient.
|
@SimoRubi please fix this as you have broken several CIs due to hard-coded dependency in test of |
|
Hi, I see that Travis of the merged commit is ✔️, which CIs are broken? |
|
Those that don't install |
Forward port of #716