[18.0][MIG] maintenance_purchase: Migration to version 18.0

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

Replaced the dependency on maintenance_account with maintenance_product, as the module works correctly without the accounting dependency
EDIT:
Also removed purchase_stock dependency to purchase
@Tecnativa TT59851
@pedrobaeza @victoralmau

[pedrobaeza]

/ocabot migration maintenance_purchase

[pedrobaeza]

Several comments:

• I don't think we need the maintenance_product dependency as well. It's not adding value.
• We should remove the flag at product level, as if you put a equipment category is enough for determining that you want to create an equipment. Why would you want to set an equipment category, but not to create an equipment? I know there's an automatism for setting the equipment category according the product category, but this is inherited from the other module, and we come back to the first point.
• Prepare the creation method to be inheritable for maintenance_product_stock for inhibiting the equipment creation when confirming, so better to refactor this creation into a separate method.

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

I think I get what you mean, but that would be a mayor refactor on how the module works right now, as instead of everything working by default configurations at product level using maintenance_product you will need to mannually set up the category everytime you create the purchase. Which IMO is a bad approach, unless we add a maintenance category at product level but in that case we are repeating configuration if the module maintenance_product is installed.
I totally agree on making the equipment creation easier to extend and just saw the method _prepare_account_move_line that need to be also removed.

[victoralmau]

Code review OK

[victoralmau]

Suggested change

	invisible="not equipment_count"
	invisible="not equipment_count"
	groups="base_maintenance_group.group_maintenance_user"

[victoralmau]

Suggested change

	<field name="equipment_category_id" optional="hide" />
	<field name="equipment_category_id" optional="hide" groups="base_maintenance_group.group_maintenance_user" />

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

I'm not sure about adding dependency to base_maintenance_group ngl

[pedrobaeza]

I think I get what you mean, but that would be a mayor refactor on how the module works right now, as instead of everything working by default configurations at product level using maintenance_product you will need to mannually set up the category everytime you create the purchase. Which IMO is a bad approach, unless we add a maintenance category at product level but in that case we are repeating configuration if the module maintenance_product is installed. I totally agree on making the equipment creation easier to extend and just saw the method _prepare_account_move_line that need to be also removed.

Right now is as well not direct, as even linking the equipment category in the product category, you need to put the check at product level, so it's very counter-intuitive (and the reason we weren't able to generate the equipment in our first tests), so I still think it's good to refactor it that way.

Changing the boolean at product level to be by default True is as well counter-intuitive, as it won't work unless the equipment category is put at product category, so both options are very bad combined.

You can keep the equipment category at product category level as default value for the purchase, but without depending on maintenance_product, and the way to not create the equipment is to empty the column, the same as in account_asset_management.

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

Instead of removing the dependency to maintenance_product as all the logic between product_category and equipment_category is there and changing the module behavior, what about adding: if we fill the equipments category at purchase line level force the creation of the equipment even if the product doesn't have the check active. This way we cover both options. WDYT @pedrobaeza

[pedrobaeza]

I'm still seeing like "black magic" behind the curtains, which is confusing for the user, so I prefer to have it explicitly set.

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

No more "black magic" here. Now, if the category is removed, the equipment will not be created. If the category is set, the equipment will be created even if the product does not have the maintenance check.

[pedrobaeza]

Why maintaining then this dependency? I want to be a stand-alone module.

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

To retain part of the old behavior, the equipment category is auto-filled from the product category, to avoid setting it on every purchase line.

[pedrobaeza]

I prefer to not have it for not dragging that module that is half baked imo

[christian-ramos-tecnativa]

Added the posibility of changing the quantity to a higher value and creating the remaining equipments when re-confirming the purchase