Review: Needs Fixing technical
Hello,
I don't understand why you needed to create new osv_memory objects to solve
this. The problem comes from the fact that the same stock.move.memory.in/out
line object is shared by both the stock.partial.picking and stock.partial.move
wizards, while there is only one reverse many2one field ('wizard_id') that can
only point to one parent object (here it was stock.partial.move).
So the minimal solution seems to be: add a second many2one field (e.g.
'wizard_pick_id') in the stock.move.memory.out object and change the definition
of the o2m fields in stock.partial.picking to use this new reverse field
instead of 'wizard_id').
Why do you need to create another object and define new views etc? For stable
versions we want to have minimalist, low-risk patches (In trunk this has been
completely refactored anyway)
Please explain why you need the extra osv_memory object, or please change use
the minimalist patch (should only need to patch 3 lines in total or something)
--
https://code.launchpad.net/~openerp-dev/openobject-addons/6.0-opw-17161-rha/+merge/74188
Your team OpenERP R&D Team is subscribed to branch
lp:~openerp-dev/openobject-addons/6.0-opw-17161-rha.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-dev-gtk
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-dev-gtk
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
