2014-07-06 11:42 GMT+02:00 Guillem Barba Domingo <[email protected]>:
> 2014-07-06 11:37 GMT+02:00 Guillem Barba Domingo <[email protected]>: > > 2014-07-05 17:14 GMT+02:00 Dale Scott <[email protected]>: >> >>> >> On Jul 5, 2014, at 7:30 AM, Cédric Krier <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> On 05 Jul 14:38, Axel Braun wrote: >>> >> Believe me, we did, and came around exactly that problem. >>> > >>> > You always seem to not know at all Tryton. >>> >>> For sure that's me, I'm trying to learn fast! ;-) >>> >>> Thanks everyone for your opinions. If I understand correctly, it seems >>> the variation functionality applies best in cases of "simple" differences >>> that do not affect price (selling S/M/L t-shirt example) or do not trigger >>> other changes (counter-example of car requiring larger generator for >>> climate control variation). >>> >>> If this model does not fit the situation, one can always a) use multiple >>> products and ignore the variation functionality, or b) customize code as >>> needed for the specific situation. That seems fair. >>> >> >> Exactly. It's very common to don't require to work with different >> variants. >> With this use case the current UX is not the best, but it is a good >> solution to have the same base code supporting variants and no variants. >> The current design allow to get any Template's field from product in the >> code. If you have a product.variant instance "variant", you can't have a >> code that takes the "name" field from it and it will return the template's >> name transparently: >> product_name = variant.name >> > > Recovering the original topic of thread, I think it could be useful (I > don't know nor investigated if it is hard to implement) that the Template's > attachments will be available from product form. > Sorry for the noise. I just discovered that the context menu over Many2One field have the "Attachments..." entry, so there is an easy way to get the attachments of product's template from product form. I still think that have the template's attachment in the product's attachment list is a good option. -- Guillem Barba http://www.guillem.alcarrer.net
