Skip to content

[18.0][MIG] rma_repair + rma_repair_lot: Migration to 18.0#503

Merged
OCA-git-bot merged 6 commits intoOCA:18.0from
Tecnativa:18.0-mig-rma_repair
Feb 12, 2026
Merged

[18.0][MIG] rma_repair + rma_repair_lot: Migration to 18.0#503
OCA-git-bot merged 6 commits intoOCA:18.0from
Tecnativa:18.0-mig-rma_repair

Conversation

@victoralmau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@victoralmau victoralmau commented Nov 12, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Migration to 18.0 + separate rma_repair into rma_repair_lot to avoid such a hard dependency (rma_lot).

Please @pilarvargas-tecnativa and @christian-ramos-tecnativa can you review it?

@Tecnativa TT57882

@victoralmau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

victoralmau commented Nov 12, 2025

I think the rma_lot dependency in

rma/rma_repair/models/rma.py

Line 58 in 18854fc

action["context"]["default_lot_id"] = self.lot_id.id
is too strict (especially because of the dependencies that rma_lot has), so I can think of different possibilities:

  • Do not add rma_lot as a dependency of rma_repair and if the lot_id field exists, define its value.
  • Do not add rma_lot as a dependency of rma_repair and add an extra module (rma_repair_lot, for example) to add only that case.

What do you think, @pedrobaeza ?

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

pedrobaeza commented Nov 12, 2025

I would go for an extra module.

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

pedrobaeza commented Nov 12, 2025

/ocabot migration rma_repair

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot added this to the 18.0 milestone Nov 12, 2025
@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2025
Open
7 tasks
@victoralmau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

victoralmau commented Nov 13, 2025

I would go for an extra module.

On second thought, I don't think it's worth the effort to separate that part into a new module just for two lines of code. In the future, the separation will have to be justified, and anyone using this module in previous versions would not be able to use it and would have to add the new one.

In any case, it will be added to the ROADMAP.

@sbejaoui
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

sbejaoui commented Nov 14, 2025

can you include these two commits please:

@christian-ramos-tecnativa
Copy link
Copy Markdown

christian-ramos-tecnativa commented Nov 14, 2025

rma/rma_repair/models/rma.py

Line 58 in 18854fc

action["context"]["default_lot_id"] = self.lot_id.id

IMO if this is the only reason to add rma_lot to the dependencies I would prefer checking if the field exists directly, as @victoralmau said, rma_lot adds many modules from stock-logistics-workflow unnecessary if you don't work with lots.

@victoralmau victoralmau force-pushed the 18.0-mig-rma_repair branch 3 times, most recently from 98815fb to c88e8c6 Compare November 18, 2025 13:52
@victoralmau victoralmau changed the title [18.0][MIG] rma_repair: Migration to 18.0 [18.0][MIG] rma_repair + rma_repair_lot: Migration to 18.0 Nov 18, 2025
@victoralmau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

victoralmau commented Nov 18, 2025

FWP of changes #503 (comment) created at 17.0: #507

Commits added from 17.0 (#507) to this PR

Separated the rma_lot part into a new rma_repair_lot module to avoid that hard dependency

@christian-ramos-tecnativa
Copy link
Copy Markdown

christian-ramos-tecnativa commented Nov 18, 2025

Shouldn't be rma_repair_lot autoinstalable?

@victoralmau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

victoralmau commented Nov 20, 2025

rma_repair_lot

I'm not sure about auto-install. What do you think, @pedrobaeza ?

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

pedrobaeza commented Nov 20, 2025

Yeah, it sounds correct.

christian-ramos-tecnativa
christian-ramos-tecnativa approved these changes Nov 20, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@christian-ramos-tecnativa christian-ramos-tecnativa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Antoni Marroig Campomar and others added 6 commits December 12, 2025 13:46
@victoralmau
[17.0][ADD] rma_repair: New module rma_repair
072ad9a 
[UPD] Update rma_repair.pot

[BOT] post-merge updates
@mymage @victoralmau
Added translation using Weblate (Italian)
5beedee 
Translated using Weblate (Italian)

Currently translated at 100.0% (7 of 7 strings)

Translation: rma-17.0/rma-17.0-rma_repair
Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/rma-17-0/rma-17-0-rma_repair/it/
@sbejaoui @victoralmau
[IMP] rma_repair: complete repair order with info from rma
5a3c008
@sbejaoui @victoralmau
[IMP] rma_repair: support automatic repair creation after confirm or …
edd8145 
…receipt

- align repair creation with other operation-level actions via new `action_create_repair` field:
  - manual_on_confirm
  - manual_after_receipt
  - automatic_on_confirm
  - automatic_after_receipt

- add `can_be_repaired` to control repair button visibility
- extend confirm and receipt flows to support automatic repair creation
@victoralmau
[IMP] rma_repair: Define Repair Action in the Repair operation
219d71e 
TT57882
@victoralmau
[MIG] rma_repair + rma_repair_lot: Migration to 18.0
9fbda95 
TT57882
@victoralmau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

victoralmau commented Feb 12, 2026

Ping @pedrobaeza

pedrobaeza
pedrobaeza approved these changes Feb 12, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/ocabot merge nobump

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OCA-git-bot commented Feb 12, 2026

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 18.0-ocabot-merge-pr-503-by-pedrobaeza-bump-nobump, awaiting test results.

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot merged commit e30d161 into OCA:18.0 Feb 12, 2026
7 checks passed
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OCA-git-bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 9b468f6. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza deleted the 18.0-mig-rma_repair branch February 12, 2026 07:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza pedrobaeza approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@christian-ramos-tecnativa christian-ramos-tecnativa christian-ramos-tecnativa approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

approved merged 🎉

Projects

None yet

Milestone

18.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@victoralmau @pedrobaeza @sbejaoui @christian-ramos-tecnativa @OCA-git-bot @mymage