[17.0][MIG] purchase_sale_stock_inter_company

[cuongnmtm]

Depends on:

• [17.0][MIG] account_invoice_inter_company #595
• [17.0][MIG] purchase_sale_inter_company #604

[github-actions]

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

[pomazanbohdan]

/ocabot migration purchase_sale_stock_inter_company

[OCA-git-bot]

Sorry @pomazanbohdan you are not allowed to mark the addon tobe migrated.

To do so you must either have push permissions on the repository, or be a declared maintainer of all modified addons.

If you wish to adopt an addon and become it's maintainer, open a pull request to add your GitHub login to the maintainers key of its manifest.

[pomazanbohdan]

@cuongnmtm Would you be so kind as to repeat the note to the bot?

/ocabot migration purchase_sale_stock_inter_company

[cuongnmtm]

/ocabot migration purchase_sale_stock_inter_company

[OCA-git-bot]

Sorry @cuongnmtm you are not allowed to mark the addon tobe migrated.

To do so you must either have push permissions on the repository, or be a declared maintainer of all modified addons.

If you wish to adopt an addon and become it's maintainer, open a pull request to add your GitHub login to the maintainers key of its manifest.

[cuongnmtm]

I don't have permission, but I believe the maintainer will somehow receive a notification about this :D

[github-actions]

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

Please rebase the branch
TT54931

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

Why?

[cuongnmtm]

Pre-commit auto fixes I guess

It just refactors the code.

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

Please include and adapt #733

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

Please include and adapt #733

ping @cuongnmtm

And remove the last commit, the dependency has already been merged.

[cuongnmtm]

Hello @carlos-lopez-tecnativa , I plan to allocate time to work on this later this week. If it's urgent on your end, please feel free to continue from where I left off. Thank you.

[pedrobaeza]

#804 should be included here.

[cuongnmtm]

I cherry-picked the related commits from:

• [16.0][ADD] purchase_sale_stock_inter_company_mrp #572
• [16.0][FIX][purchase_sale_stock_inter_company] synchronize inter-company picking qty #789
• [16.0][FIX][purchase_sale_stock_inter_company] multiple products leads to a backorder #804

and adapted the migration code with the refactored code.

[cuongnmtm]

Something went wrong. I tried to solve conflicts, and the migration changes were moved to the conflicted commit. I will need to redo it.

[cuongnmtm]

There are two issues when process the backorder wizard:

• test_sync_picking_lot_and_qty_with_move_diff_2: You need to supply a Lot/Serial Number for product: Stockable Product Tracked by Serial
• test_inter_company_purchase_sale_stock: This lot 111 is incompatible with this product Stockable Product

I am checking it

[cuongnmtm]

Need to remove the extra moves in case:

# remove the extra move lines in the receipt of lot tracking product
# example: In the receipt, we have 3 move lines for 3 different serials,
# in the delivery we specify 2 serials. When validating the delivery and
# creating back order, Odoo generates 3 move lines in the receipt, so
# we need to remove 1 different move line in the receipt, otherwise it
# will cause an error saying that we need to assign a lot or serial
# for the remaining move line

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

When I try to validate a picking from the sale order, I get this error:

[cuongnmtm]

When I try to validate a picking from the sale order, I get this error:

This is multi-company rule. I will add sudo to bypass it.

[cuongnmtm]

When I try to validate a picking from the sale order, I get this error:

This is multi-company rule. I will add sudo to bypass it.

actually no need sudo but with_company does the job

[cuongnmtm]

Thanks @carlos-lopez-tecnativa for your review.
I updated the code to add a missing with_company to solve your issue, and updated these tests, which hide this issue.
I updated the readme and test as well.

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

Please include and adapt #733

From that PR, I noticed that this commit bc478bf which synchronizes stock.move.line when the move is in the done state (and the picking is unlocked), is not included.
Could you please include it or explain why it was discarded?

Additionally, this module has a strange history. In v14, it existed as a single module: purchase_sale_inter_company.
At Tecnativa, we backported it to v13 and split it into two modules: purchase_sale_inter_company and purchase_sale_stock_inter_company, as was done in v15, see this PR: #547. In v14, I found these two PRs: #600 and #656 They were never included in v15, but I think their features could be useful here.
Could you please cherry-pick and adapt those PRs?

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

Additionally, I noticed that commit 8e705ae (for pre-commit autofixes) should only contain automatic formatting changes. However, it includes functional/code changes that shouldn't be in that type of commit.

These extra changes should be moved to the migration commit in order to keep a clean and accurate Git history.

[cuongnmtm]

@carlos-lopez-tecnativa

From that PR, I noticed that this commit bc478bf which synchronizes stock.move.line when the move is in the done state (and the picking is unlocked), is not included.
Could you please include it or explain why it was discarded?

The logic is handled in stock.picking. All tests are passed.

Additionally, this module has a strange history. In v14, it existed as a single module: purchase_sale_inter_company.
At Tecnativa, we backported it to v13 and split it into two modules: purchase_sale_inter_company and purchase_sale_stock_inter_company, as was done in v15, see this PR: #547. In v14, I found these two PRs: #600 and #656 They were never included in v15, but I think their features could be useful here.
Could you please cherry-pick and adapt those PRs?

I will have a look on Friday

[metaminux]

Hello @cuongnmtm and @carlos-lopez-tecnativa

As mentioned in previous comments, the history of the module is quite a mess...

There were only one module purchase_sale_inter_company in 14.0 with maintainers : @aleuffre and @renda-dev

It has been split in purchase_sale_inter_company and purchase_sale_stock_inter_company from 14.0 to 15.0 (see #370 and #371 by @JasminSForgeFlow)

But a lot of improvements were added to 14.0 after that and never ported to 15.0 because it's harder to forward port due to the split.
Some attempts were done, but it's not so easy (see sunflowerit#3 and a lot of comments in PRs when @pedrobaeza asked for porting to newer versions)

Then, original module was split in 13.0 also...

And now, some PRs were merged to 16.0, adding features already present in 14.0, and facing same problems with different ways to fix...

I'm trying to migrate modules purchase_sale_stock_inter_company to 18.0 and purchase_sale_stock_inter_company_mrp to 17.0 and 18.0...

I'd like to use this PR has base for the migrations, but I feel @cuongnmtm is a bit lonely here, right ?

@OCA/intercompany-maintainers Can we gather efforts to clean all that mess ?

I'm trying to get the full history of issues and PRs for each version from 13.0 to 16.0, i'll try to post it here (or in another PR...)
I think 14.0 is the one with all features and tests but only one module, maybe we need to rewrite modules in 16.0 before doing the migration ?

Any thoughts everyone ?

[pedrobaeza]

I understand your pain, and there has been conflicting interests with some people only working on 14.0 while others working on upper versions. We can try to gather everything together through @carlos-lopez-tecnativa if you agree.

[metaminux]

I understand your pain, and there has been conflicting interests with some people only working on 14.0 while others working on upper versions. We can try to gather everything together through @carlos-lopez-tecnativa if you agree.

Sure, what would be the better way ?

I think porting tests from 14.0 to 16.0 one by one with code making each test pass in each commit would be easier for review...
Maybe opening a new issue with sub issues for each commit ?

[carlos-lopez-tecnativa]

I understand your pain, and there has been conflicting interests with some people only working on 14.0 while others working on upper versions. We can try to gather everything together through @carlos-lopez-tecnativa if you agree.

Sure, what would be the better way ?

I think porting tests from 14.0 to 16.0 one by one with code making each test pass in each commit would be easier for review... Maybe opening a new issue with sub issues for each commit ?

I'm working on this PR to forward-port all features from V13 and V14. Please review this PR and let me know if you have any questions.

Superseded by #856

[pedrobaeza]

Let's close this one then. Do you agree, @cuongnmtm ?