[18.0][MIG] account_billing_from_cutoff: migration to 18.0 - #110
Conversation
264f0cd to
756099a
Compare
756099a to
7c232d6
Compare
7c232d6 to
b26e89b
Compare
b26e89b to
4ea7445
Compare
4ea7445 to
9ce83f6
Compare
|
Depends on OCA/account-invoicing#2318 |
9ce83f6 to
49ea11c
Compare
49ea11c to
d533a86
Compare
nobuQuartile
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM: Code review and functional review.
Minor point.
7ae1b1e to
82a48e8
Compare
82a48e8 to
77b7691
Compare
77b7691 to
9f54ed1
Compare
|
I updated to set threshold date from cutoff and consider |
9f54ed1 to
6ddeb41
Compare
| xml_id = ( | ||
| "account_billing.action_customer_billing" | ||
| if self.bill_type == "out_invoice" | ||
| else "account_billing.action_supplier_billing" | ||
| ) | ||
| action = self.env["ir.actions.act_window"]._for_xml_id(xml_id) | ||
| action["domain"] = [("id", "in", billings.ids)] | ||
| return action |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this be part of the migration commit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. It is since we have to adjust view type in migration commit.
Updated!.
… match billing by bank - Group moves by remit-to bank and restrict the existing-billing lookup to the current company, so invoices with different partner banks are not merged. - Set threshold_date from the wizard's cutoff date on new billings, and raise it on an updated billing, so validation is not blocked by lines dated after it. - Only reuse a billing that is based on invoice dates, as the cutoff date is derived from the invoice date. The threshold date handling is documented in the usage section.
…l_type Keep the line order of an updated billing consistent with manually created billings, and make bill_type required as it is always set from the action context.
6ddeb41 to
ac94731
Compare
|
/ocabot merge nobump |
|
This PR has the |
|
Hey, thanks for contributing! Proceeding to merge this for you. |
|
Congratulations, your PR was merged at db6ff9a. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️ |
@qrtl QT5606