[10.0] Port report_py3o #78
Conversation
|
The problem with double dot in filename is now fixed |
|
Last refactoring of @lmignon is done here: For this current PR take also a special attention to akretion#1 -jne |
[FIX] setup.py for odoo10
The goal is to improve the modularity by making the parser a true inheritable odoo model and share part of the code with the 'report' model Conflicts: report_py3o/models/ir_actions_report_xml.py report_py3o/models/py3o_report.py report_py3o/tests/test_report_py3o.py
Conflicts: report_py3o/models/py3o_report.py
* flake8
|
@lmignon is it ok for you to merge this PR as is or do you need more time? I have people who want to base work on yours to port back to older odoo versions... |
|
@faide The proposed refactoring akretion#2 works fine in production with a lot of improvements. I test finalize my tests in the next hours of acsone@4048c0b and keep you informed once everything is ok |
|
@faide @alexis-via akretion#2 is ready to be merged. I've developed a new module that extends Py3o Report by letting you specify a rule to choose the appropriate template to use according to an expected language....acsone@ac196cc This new module use the changes in the last commit of akretion#2 as extension point. |
10.0 refactor py3o jne
lmignon
left a comment
lmignon
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's time to move forward 😄
rousseldenis
left a comment
rousseldenis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 Code review + tested
JonathanNEMRY
left a comment
JonathanNEMRY
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ready for merge...please don't squash commits...
|
Seriously 133 commits without any squash? You have a total crusade against squashing, but I think this is not sustainable as the repo will grow too much in size for no real benefit with several diffs that nullify each other. |
|
I can see the commit history is huge and mostly irrelevant (many things seem to come from a migration from a mercurial repo, with tagging, updating .hgignore and so on). Indeed rebasing it would be a nightmare, but also we get lots of unneeded history. There's the fine balance between authorship and usefulness of commits, but in general I'm more against useless commits, so IMHO it would be good if you squash it (at least, per author and following history, we'd still have about 30 commits, but that feels better in the balance). |
|
I think that 133 commits for a 6-year-long history of work is pretty small. And there are many different authors that worked together on it, so it's not possible to merge all the commits together. So we should merge this PR WITHOUT SQUASHING anything. I'm not the only one that thinks that this pro-squashing obsession is starting to be unbearable. And there is a significant risk of killing the motivation of contributors like me and others. This thread will be observed by sraps and other Aeroo fans and we are giving them additional arguments NOT to join the OCA... because working in the OCA is starting to be a nightmare and new rules and regulations are invented every month or so. |
|
OK, do what you think is correct. |
|
Ok, merged, not worth it the fight. Thanks for your contribution pals 😉 |
|
👏 |
14 participants
No description provided.