Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[16.0][IMP] dms_field: Add partner embedded DMS template #378

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 25, 2024

Conversation

victoralmau
Copy link
Member

@victoralmau victoralmau commented Nov 19, 2024

Add partner embedded DMS template

Fixes #377

Please @pedrobaeza and @CarlosRoca13 can you review it?

@Tecnativa

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

We should avoid using demo data on tests.

@victoralmau victoralmau force-pushed the 16.0-imp-dms_field-issue-377 branch 2 times, most recently from be9b288 to 1b78a1d Compare November 19, 2024 09:32
@victoralmau
Copy link
Member Author

We should avoid using demo data on tests.

I don't totally agree, but ok, it's already changed.

@victoralmau
Copy link
Member Author

Ping @pedrobaeza

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza added this to the 16.0 milestone Nov 25, 2024
Copy link
Member

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should avoid using demo data on tests.

I don't totally agree, but ok, it's already changed.

About this, the reasons are:

  • Being self-contained: any change on data across versions/updates that affect the tests are not contained on the test file itself, and they are more difficult to be traced.
  • Being reliable: if you depend on demo data, that demo data may be manually altered on the current DB, making the test to fail.

Thus, we must avoid it, the same as finally Odoo has done in its own tests.

In this module, I also see more dependencies to demo data (like dms.access_group_01_demo, dms.storage_demo, etc), so they must be removed.

dms_field/tests/test_dms_field.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@victoralmau victoralmau force-pushed the 16.0-imp-dms_field-issue-377 branch from 1b78a1d to 0b6c950 Compare November 25, 2024 16:53
Copy link
Member

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/ocabot merge patch

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-378-by-pedrobaeza-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot merged commit 9094d39 into OCA:16.0 Nov 25, 2024
7 checks passed
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 1670f54. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza deleted the 16.0-imp-dms_field-issue-377 branch November 25, 2024 20:54
victoralmau added a commit to Tecnativa/dms that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2024
We need to avoid applying a template except when testing functionality
with dms_field* modules to avoid the error that a directory with the same
name already exists (example: create partner).

Related to OCA#378
victoralmau added a commit to Tecnativa/dms that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2024
We need to avoid applying a template except when testing functionality
with dms_field* modules to avoid the error that a directory with the same
name already exists (example: create partner).

Related to OCA#378
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants