[MIG] 9.0 - Migrate 'base_user_role'#641
Conversation
…CA#608) * [ADD] New module 'base_user_role' * [FIX] base_user_role - Review * [FIX] base_user_role - Review s/is_active/is_enabled/ * [FIX] base_user_role - Review s/is_active/is_enabled/ * [IMP] base_user_role - Translations updated (template + FR) * [FIX] base_user_role - Lint
sebalix
changed the title
| <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> | ||
| <!-- Copyright 2016 ABF OSIELL <http://osiell.com> | ||
| License AGPL-3.0 or later (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl). --> | ||
| <odoo> |
| @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ | |||
| # -*- coding: utf-8 -*- | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Past version migration can be removed
| <field name="inherit_id" ref="base.view_users_form"/> | ||
| <field name="arch" type="xml"> | ||
| <notebook position="inside"> | ||
| <page string="Roles"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What would you think about putting the Roles as first page in the notebook, ie before the standards groups page. As admins using this module will almost never look at the detailed groups, it's probably better to show roles first.
| line_ids = fields.One2many( | ||
| 'res.users.role.line', 'role_id', string=u"Users") | ||
| user_ids = fields.One2many( | ||
| 'res.users', string=u"Users", compute='_compute_user_ids') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since roles are groups too, it would be nice to put them in their own category so they are more easily distinguished from regular groups in the groups configuration page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is exactly how we do when declaring our roles as XML records, it could be done by default by associating them to a 'User roles' category indeed.
| group_category_id = fields.Many2one( | ||
| related='group_id.category_id', | ||
| default=lambda cls: cls.env.ref( | ||
| 'base_user_role.ir_module_category_role').id) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cool, thanks for adding this. Would it work too with a simple override category_id = fields.Many2one(default=...)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It does not work without the related part. About the field's name, I don't know what is best.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
so weird to me... anyway it works fine, thanks!
|
2 thumbs up and 5 days, ready to merge I think ;) I'll start the migration to v10 soon. |
|
Can you please squash your fixes in the review process commits? |
[IMP] base_user_role - Replace '<openerp>' tags by '<odoo>' + Remove useless '<data>' tags + Reindent XML content [FIX] base_user_role - Fix noupdate declaration [REM] base_user_role - Remove old migration script
12ce852 to
167d999
Compare
|
@pedrobaeza Done, I kept the commits from @sbidoul and the last one related to the default module category as they are new features which could be backported on the 8.0 version. |
|
Thanks for the comprehensive squashing! I'll merge when CIs finish. |
Syncing from upstream OCA/server-tools (10.0)
4 participants
@lasley here it is