8000 [14.0][FIX] excel_import_export: external ids naming. by kittiu · Pull Request #2283 · OCA/server-tools · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

[14.0][FIX] excel_import_export: external ids naming. #2283

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 14.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kittiu
Copy link
Member
@kittiu kittiu commented Feb 12, 2022

FW Port from #1899

Because of the naming given to the external ID's, Odoo
interprets all this data as regular module data and when
you update the module and those external ID's are not present
in the module files, it tries to delete them.

Because of the naming given to the external ID's, Odoo
interprets all this data as regular module data and when
you update the module and those external ID's are not present
in the module files, it tries to delete them.
Copy link
@luc-demeyer luc-demeyer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This fix prevents the deletion of the records since excel_import_export is a non-existing module name.

But I think we should be consistent and hence change also the following line accordingly:

or "{}.{}".format("xls", uuid.uuid4())

or "{}.{}".format("xls", uuid.uuid4()) : xls -> __excel_import_export

Otherwise we have two different module names in the xml_id for records updated or created by the excel_import_export module.

@Mantux11
Copy link
Contributor

In commit there is [12.0], but this PR would merge to 14.0. Change that:)

@kittiu
Copy link
Member Author
kittiu commented Oct 18, 2022

I thought for FW port it is correct like this, just pull the commit here. No?

@Mantux11
Copy link
Contributor

Oh well. I don't catch that. Maybe that's correct

Copy link
@norlinhenrik norlinhenrik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The suggestion by @luc-demeyer is included in #2329

AungKoKoLin1997 pushed a commit to qrtl/server-tools that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2022
@norlinhenrik
Copy link

This PR is approved by 2 reviewers. Can we merge it?

@norlinhenrik
Copy link

According to this PR and the discussion, xlsx_import.py has __excel_import_export__ twice in both version 15.0 and 16.0.

This PR has __excel_import_export__ only once. With no activity in a year, I think it is time to close it.

Josep-s73 pushed a commit to Studio73/server-tools that referenced this pull request Jul 17, 2024
Josep-s73 pushed a commit to Studio73/server-tools that referenced this pull request Sep 3, 2024
xaviedoanhduy pushed a commit to xaviedoanhduy/server-tools that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2025
xaviedoanhduy pushed a commit to xaviedoanhduy/server-tools that referenced this pull request Feb 20, 2025
xaviedoanhduy pushed a commit to xaviedoanhduy/server-tools that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2025
xaviedoanhduy pushed a commit to xaviedoanhduy/server-tools that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2025
Copy link
github-actions bot commented May 4, 2025

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 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 PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label May 4, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants
0