Refactor account_loan & Introduce account_leasing

[petrus-v]

Context
Currently, the account_loan module handles both standard financial loans and leasing contracts via a boolean field is_leasing. This approach limits flexibility and mixes different concepts (e.g., miscellaneous journal entries vs. vendor bills).

Additionally, we need to introduce support for the Purchase Option (buyout) at the end of leasing contracts.

Objective
Clearly separate the generic loan management from leasing specifics and enrich the leasing functionalities.

1. Refactor account_loan (Base)

This module will focus on the generic management of loan contracts, primarily for financial loans.

• New loan_type field: Replace the is_leasing boolean with a loan_type Selection field.
  • Initial values: loan (Loan given), borrow (Loan received).
  • The type will determine the default accounting behavior (e.g., Journal types).
  • The field should be editable in draft state and become read-only once the loan is posted or lines are generated.
• Cleanup: Extract the logic specific to vendor bill generation (currently triggered by is_leasing to move it into the new module.

2. New module account_leasing

This module will depend on account_loan and extend it for leasing contracts.

• Extend loan_type: Add the leasing value to the selection.
• Leasing Logic:
  • Implement logic to generate Vendor Bills or miscellaneous operation entries.
    Note: This behavior should be configurable.
• Purchase Option Management:
  • Add configuration on the contract to define the account used for the purchase option.
  • Add a flag on the loan line to identify the "Purchase Option" exercise.
  • Provide a wizard or mechanism to easily "exercise" this option and generate the corresponding final entry/invoice.

3. Migration

• provide script to migrate from 18 to 19 easly

[petrus-v]

@etobella @pedrobaeza do you have any opinion/advise regarding this refactor proposal ?

cc @AnizR

[pedrobaeza]

Do you really think it's worth to split due to the great amount of code shared for both?

[etobella]

For me it is not a problem, I don't know if the split is really needed (maybe leasing module will not have too much entity), but well, I understand what you want to achieve.

[pedrobaeza]

Anyway, this shouldn't be done in any of the already merged versions, and should include migration scripts for marking the new module to install if detected that it has been used, so I'm still reluctant to say that it's worth to make the split.

[petrus-v]

Thanks for your prompt replies.

Sorry I forgot to tell the target version is 19.0, so I'll ask to delay those PRs and experiment that on top of it:

• [19.0][MIG] account_loan #2222
• [19.0] account_loan forward port #2229

[github-actions]

There hasn't been any activity on this issue in the past 6 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this issue to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.