[16.0][ADD] stock_account_move_reset_to_draft: New module

[victoralmau]

New module

Please @pedrobaeza and @carlosdauden can you review it?

@Tecnativa TT51201

[yostashiro]

Looks like we should converge the ideas. OCA/account-financial-tools#1946 :)
CC: @rousseldenis

[pedrobaeza]

This one seems more complete, handling all the SVLs adjustments.

[yostashiro]

Why "multi" in the module name?

[pedrobaeza]

Because you can reset to draft "multiple" times. The standard only allows one.

[yostashiro]

The standard only allows one.

I don't see it this way. You can reset a bill to draft multiple times with the standard as long as there is no adjustment SVL, no?

[pedrobaeza]

Yes, correct, but we are referring if you change the price multiple times. That's difficult to be reflected in the technical name, but if you have a nicer name, we are all ears.

[yostashiro]

My preference is stock_account_move_force_reset_to_draft but it's not a strong one. I was just curious.

[carlosdauden]

Code LGTM

[rousseldenis]

Looks like we should converge the ideas. OCA/account-financial-tools#1946 :) CC: @rousseldenis

Yes, I think this one is better in terms of reliability and avoid to enforce additional protections on prices changes or ...

[rousseldenis]

Yes, correct, but we are referring if you change the price multiple times. That's difficult to be reflected in the technical name, but if you have a nicer name, we are all ears.

I'm also in favor of not making 'multi' in the name. As, if you do it once, you can dot it more. That's the same principle for all existing modules that reset objects to draft state. But you can add it to USAGE which is a good approach IMHO.

[pedrobaeza]

Then which name?

[rousseldenis]

stock_account_move_force_reset_to_draft

Preference for stock_account_move_reset_to_draft which means what it does.

[pedrobaeza]

OK, let's rename it, but first please do the review for performing all the possible changes at the same time.

[yostashiro]

Can you please check my suggestion?

[rousseldenis]

@victoralmau @pedrobaeza Could you check @yostashiro comments ?

[victoralmau]

Renamed to stock_account_move_reset_to_draft and applied the changes suggested in #1813 (comment) (personally I think it is adding logic that this module should not have).

[yostashiro]

personally I think it is adding logic that this module should not have

@victoralmau Thanks for the update but I'm not sure where your comment is coming from. If an implementation risks compromising data integrity/consistency, we must do our best to prevent that. No question about it, IMO.

[gdgellatly]

@pedrobaeza @victoralmau I added some comments here OCA/account-financial-tools#1947 (comment) about an alternative approach which is strictly speaking less accurate, but more tolerant of intervening transactions (e.g. valuation already fixed, sold though etc) and avoids editing svl's. I make no claim that it is better or worse, just food for thought.

[kanda999]

Functional test.

[pedrobaeza]

We have a good start with some constraints and amount rectifications code, so let's merge it, and we can improve it later when used in real cases.

/ocabot merge nobump

[OCA-git-bot]

On my way to merge this fine PR!
Prepared branch 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1813-by-pedrobaeza-bump-nobump, awaiting test results.

[yostashiro]

Maybe it's too late now, but there is an issue with the code. We will propose a fix in another PR if it's too late.

[OCA-git-bot]

@pedrobaeza your merge command was aborted due to failed check(s), which you can inspect on this commit of 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1813-by-pedrobaeza-bump-nobump.

After fixing the problem, you can re-issue a merge command. Please refrain from merging manually as it will most probably make the target branch red.

[pedrobaeza]

I have cancelled the CI. Tell us the problem.

[yostashiro]

@pedrobaeza Thanks!

This is why the error didn't reproduce: #1813 (comment)

[victoralmau]

Changes done.

[yostashiro]

LGTM just with a correction of the license. Thanks!

[pedrobaeza]

/ocabot merge nobump

[OCA-git-bot]

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1813-by-pedrobaeza-bump-nobump, awaiting test results.

[OCA-git-bot]

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

[OCA-git-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 697bc18. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

[rrebollo]

we can improve it later when used in real cases.

We have a customer being hit by this. We deployed OCA/account-financial-tools#1962 for them but if @yostashiro looks our code and PR description there and grant us this addon cover the same use case we are open to deploy this and we'll give U feedback about it.