[18.0][MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 18.0 #932

CarlosRoca13 · 2025-01-15T09:44:25Z

[UPD] Update delivery_package_number.pot [UPD] README.rst

[UPD] Update delivery_package_number.pot [UPD] README.rst Update translation files Updated by "Update PO files to match POT (msgmerge)" hook in Weblate. Translation: delivery-carrier-14.0/delivery-carrier-14.0-delivery_package_number Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/delivery-carrier-14-0/delivery-carrier-14-0-delivery_package_number/

TT36946

…ransfer wizard if picking have not carrier. TT38549

TT40420

Fixes OCA#676

…zard

…delivery_carrier_label module

…nd new labels

…lidation

…es wizard. TT48170

If we don't return the print action the label won't be downloaded. TT48759

pedrobaeza · 2025-01-15T20:26:21Z

/ocabot migration delivery_package_number

hparfr · 2025-01-20T14:37:34Z

delivery_package_number/models/stock_picking.py

-            if picking.package_ids:
-                picking.number_of_packages = len(picking.package_ids)
+            packages = picking.move_line_ids.result_package_id
+            if packages:


why this if ?

Because we don't want to loose the info set on number_of_packages when no packages are set when modifying the move_line_ids

jbaudoux

Some delivery modules depend on this field number_of_packages on the picking but not everyone need this wizard to manually enter a number of parcels.
In my opinion, this module deserves to be split in 2 modules.
I remember some old discussions on this matter. cc @mt-software-de

And it would be the occasion to make it compatible with https://github.com/OCA/delivery-carrier/pull/973/files#diff-c8a077a1b4a9e53784be8d2bd8afc36a7ef4a45e87e29ba9bd5712f1927e71c7R10
cc @rousseldenis @lmignon

jbaudoux · 2025-02-17T08:39:55Z

delivery_package_number/models/stock_picking.py

+    number_of_packages = fields.Integer(
+        string="Number of Packages",
+        compute="_compute_number_of_packages",
+        readonly=False,
+        store=True,
+        default=0,
+        copy=False,
+    )


Any chance to extract this in a separate module stock_picking_number_package in stock-logistics-warehouse ?

mt-software-de · 2025-02-17T11:41:41Z

Some delivery modules depend on this field number_of_packages on the picking but not everyone need this wizard to manually enter a number of parcels. In my opinion, this module deserves to be split in 2 modules. I remember some old discussions on this matter. cc @mt-software-de

And it would be the occasion to make it compatible with https://github.com/OCA/delivery-carrier/pull/973/files#diff-c8a077a1b4a9e53784be8d2bd8afc36a7ef4a45e87e29ba9bd5712f1927e71c7R10 cc @rousseldenis @lmignon

Yes but the discussion was on the automatic package creation. Which was a problem when running the unittests.
#854

But still i think it would be great to separate it.

sergio-teruel · 2025-02-17T14:29:32Z

Hi, maybe other option is add an option to ask or not the number of packages...

delivery-carrier/delivery_package_number/models/stock_picking.py

Lines 43 to 50 in 5331e6a

    
           def _compute_ask_number_of_packages(self): 
        
               """To Know if is needed raise wizard to ask user by package number""" 
        
               for picking in self: 
        
                   picking.ask_number_of_packages = bool( 
        
                       picking.carrier_id 
        
                       and not picking.move_line_ids.result_package_id 
        
                       or picking.picking_type_id.force_set_number_of_packages 
        
                   )

jbaudoux

Another remark regarding module name.
Several carrier API use the term of package number to identify the "position" of the package in a list of packages. For example, when you have 3 packages and you number them 1/3, 2/3, 3/3, the package number is 1 (2 and 3 resp.) and the package total is 3.

What about renaming this module to stock_delivery_number_packages ?

jbaudoux · 2025-02-25T10:32:40Z

delivery_package_number/__manifest__.py

+# Copyright 2020 Tecnativa - David Vidal
+# License AGPL-3.0 or later (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl).
+{
+    "name": "Stock Picking Package Number",


Maybe align with module name?

pedrobaeza · 2025-02-25T11:26:00Z

Just a remark: module names shouldn't contain plurals

CarlosRoca13 · 2025-02-27T10:02:56Z

I have added an option to prevent the wizard from popping up in the operation type.

jbaudoux · 2025-02-27T10:12:27Z

I have added an option to prevent the wizard from popping up in the operation type.

@CarlosRoca13 Thanks. I prefer opt-in than opt-out options. Otherwise, set opt-out default to True

CarlosRoca13 · 2025-02-27T10:26:30Z

I have added an option to prevent the wizard from popping up in the operation type.

@CarlosRoca13 Thanks. I prefer opt-in than opt-out options. Otherwise, set opt-out default to True

And what about the customers who already have these modules? Will they lose a feature during the migration, or will it be necessary to include a script to disable the field for existing operation types?

From my point of view, the field should remain as it is now to avoid giving customers the impression that they are losing a feature and to prevent spending extra time creating a script that would achieve the same result.

What do you think? @pedrobaeza @sergio-teruel

pedrobaeza · 2025-02-27T10:29:15Z

Yes, the default for the option should preserve the existing behavior. Those not wanting them should change that default option on their installations.

mt-software-de · 2025-02-27T10:39:40Z

I have added an option to prevent the wizard from popping up in the operation type.

@CarlosRoca13 Thanks. I prefer opt-in than opt-out options. Otherwise, set opt-out default to True

And what about the customers who already have these modules? Will they lose a feature during the migration, or will it be necessary to include a script to disable the field for existing operation types?

From my point of view, the field should remain as it is now to avoid giving customers the impression that they are losing a feature and to prevent spending extra time creating a script that would achieve the same result.

What do you think? @pedrobaeza @sergio-teruel

It should be like @jbaudoux mentioned it, if someone using it already you should create a migration for it.
But in my opinion the best way would be to separate those features, then we wouldn't need a option to enable or disable the wizard.

jbaudoux · 2025-02-27T10:45:12Z

Just a remark: module names shouldn't contain plurals

stock_delivery_number_package then ? Is that helping to remove confusion? FYI, the planned package number module would be named stock_quant_package_number in stock-logistics-tracking repo

pedrobaeza · 2025-02-27T10:45:57Z

Well, it's true that splitting into 2 modules is not something wild: delivery_package_number and delivery_package_number_report or similar. A migration script should force the installation of the second for not having troubles on the migration path.

jbaudoux · 2025-02-27T10:57:07Z

Well, it's true that splitting into 2 modules is not something wild: delivery_package_number and delivery_package_number_report or similar. A migration script should force the installation of the second for not having troubles on the migration path.

(edited)

stock_picking_number_package in stock-logistics-warehouse for the computed field on stock.picking used by other modules
(stock_)delivery_number_package in delivery-carrier for the wizard with the option to opt-out
stock_picking_report_number_package in stock-logistics-reporting for the report

chienandalu and others added 20 commits January 15, 2025 08:14

[ADD] delivery_package_number: New module

b1648a0

Added translation using Weblate (Slovenian)

f870275

[IMP] delivery_package_number: black, isort, prettier

f568963

[MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 13.0

2ae3c7b

[UPD] Update delivery_package_number.pot [UPD] README.rst

[IMP] delivery_package_number: black, isort, prettier

3b244e0

[MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 15.0

c919d7b

TT36946

[IMP] delivery_package_number: Hide Number of packages in Immediate T…

492d854

…ransfer wizard if picking have not carrier. TT38549

[MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 16.0

16186e0

TT40420

[FIX] delivery_package_number: Don't reset number on backorder

3439e31

Fixes OCA#676

[IMP] delivery_package_number: number of packages in the backorder wi…

b32b89a

…zard

[FIX] delivery_package_number: inhibit auto-create packets from base_…

2d4b7a0

…delivery_carrier_label module

[IMP] delivery_package_number: Allow set package numbers at confirm a…

474a2db

…nd new labels

[IMP] delivery_package_number: Make compatible with multi pickings va…

da82bcf

…lidation

[IMP] delivery_package_number: Ask only once for the number of packag…

10af515

…es wizard. TT48170

[FIX] delivery_package_number: download label

8b213d8

If we don't return the print action the label won't be downloaded. TT48759

[IMP] delivery_package_number: pre-commit auto fixes

7a7828c

[MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 17.0

342b7bb

Added translation using Weblate (Italian)

f93e349

[IMP] delivery_package_number: pre-commit auto fixes

2e1e942

CarlosRoca13 force-pushed the 18.0-MIG-delivery_package_number branch from 61324bd to 5331e6a Compare January 15, 2025 09:47

OCA-git-bot added this to the 18.0 milestone Jan 15, 2025

OCA-git-bot mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2025

Migration to version 18.0 #889

Open

23 tasks

rousseldenis added needs review migration labels Jan 16, 2025

rousseldenis approved these changes Jan 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

hparfr reviewed Jan 20, 2025

View reviewed changes

jbaudoux reviewed Feb 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

jbaudoux reviewed Feb 25, 2025

View reviewed changes

[MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 18.0

45212d5

CarlosRoca13 force-pushed the 18.0-MIG-delivery_package_number branch from 5331e6a to 45212d5 Compare February 27, 2025 10:00

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[18.0][MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 18.0 #932

[18.0][MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 18.0 #932

CarlosRoca13 commented Jan 15, 2025

pedrobaeza commented Jan 15, 2025

hparfr Jan 20, 2025

CarlosRoca13 Jan 20, 2025

jbaudoux left a comment

jbaudoux Feb 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mt-software-de commented Feb 17, 2025

sergio-teruel commented Feb 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

jbaudoux left a comment

jbaudoux Feb 25, 2025

CarlosRoca13 Feb 27, 2025

pedrobaeza commented Feb 25, 2025

CarlosRoca13 commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux commented Feb 27, 2025

CarlosRoca13 commented Feb 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading

pedrobaeza commented Feb 27, 2025

mt-software-de commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux commented Feb 27, 2025

pedrobaeza commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux commented Feb 27, 2025

[18.0][MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 18.0 #932

Are you sure you want to change the base?

[18.0][MIG] delivery_package_number: Migration to 18.0 #932

Conversation

CarlosRoca13 commented Jan 15, 2025

pedrobaeza commented Jan 15, 2025

hparfr Jan 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

CarlosRoca13 Jan 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbaudoux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbaudoux Feb 17, 2025 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mt-software-de commented Feb 17, 2025

sergio-teruel commented Feb 17, 2025 • edited Loading

jbaudoux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jbaudoux Feb 25, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

CarlosRoca13 Feb 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pedrobaeza commented Feb 25, 2025

CarlosRoca13 commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux commented Feb 27, 2025

CarlosRoca13 commented Feb 27, 2025 • edited Loading

pedrobaeza commented Feb 27, 2025

mt-software-de commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux commented Feb 27, 2025

pedrobaeza commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux commented Feb 27, 2025

jbaudoux Feb 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

sergio-teruel commented Feb 17, 2025 •

edited

Loading

CarlosRoca13 commented Feb 27, 2025 •

edited

Loading