openerp-community team mailing list archive

[Nhomar Hernández <nhomar@xxxxxxxxx>]

Anthony,


2014-04-28 21:25 GMT-05:00 Antony Lesuisse <al@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

> Sorry for being rude, my point here was simply that if somebody really
> wants something it's probably easier to work on it than to convince someone
> else to do it.
>

Yes you where rude, me too! just understand your vision and mine are so
likely then when I complain is because i need the best for the project and
OpenERP and we as company. don't worry about it.

>
> For OpenERP Enterprise customers, our the migration service will find a
> solution for a smooth upgrade path on specific basis. (most likely
> base_action_rules). Maybe they will fix the module to make it work for v8.
> But this will happen after june.
>

Ok, this is what I think we need to plan this migration to work for the
future, can you point me with who I need to talk.

Even, my initial point was that I think the end of the road will be
audittrails like features (even with a new module re-using
base_action_rule) this is my point.

We administer several databases, and honestly our live without audittrail
will be too difficult.

Even, I was specting that you improve with more features audittrail in the
re-write process like audit fields, access rules failures and so on.... but
honestly I was really bad surprised with the total removal.


>
> We decided to move auditail to extra (with other modules) as we think they
> dont meet the quality standard for a long term release and we have
> alternative solutions to the use case (althought not fully equivalent).
> Auditrail in trunk is broken since 1 year and the only MP about it was made
> by Stefan Rijnhart 2 years ago.
>

And you can sum several open bugs over it.

Honestly, I don't know if you did it intentional, but who kill Audittrail
was your self not the technical problems, with a low encourga to solve bugs
and no answer on it people stop use it.


>
> I want to close the merge window for v8 and we will merge wms this week
> and new api next week (not sure 100% yet). So even if we fix auditrail it
> will be later and the module wont be part of v8.
>

Understood

>
> Sometime i have to decide to stop supporting bad code because it increase
> the technical debt too much. It then becomes a nightmare for the openerp
> enterprise team to support. It happened with the gtk client, and caldav in
> v7.
>

Yes I understand your point (but I can not be agreed) you have a paid
service, and it is mandatory IMHO have a plan of migration feature per
feature inmediatly a customer ask for it.

You can not defend the "leak" of feature as little important directly
without try to offer solutions on your side.

I mean, taking this case as an example, you leak of 5 or 6 features to
complay with everything, why not just do it instead discredit our PoV as
"Community" and as "Customers" (at least it was my feeling).


>
> If i'm wrong, thanks to the open source nature of openerp, then i'm sure
> people will come to fix and maintain the code. I'm actually interested by
> the result of the survey. I just think that, often, time is better spent on
> code than on twitter :)
>

The result of the survey here:

https://es.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-BP53Q9R/

>

> The good news is that after the wms merge quentin and his team will work
> full time on improving account and account localisations.


On this point i REALLY ask you announce the branch to test new features.

Our localizations has a lot of little features that are even included in a
generic way we can explain that features.

lp:openerp-mexico-localization
lp:openerpvenezuela-localization


>
>
> On 04/29/2014 02:14 AM, Antony Lesuisse wrote:
>
>> If someone wants a version of auditrail working for v8 it would be much
>> more
>> productive to fix it than to complaint about it, make surveys and spam
>> twitter.
>>
>> The source code is on launchpad, i provided the guideline on how to fix
>> it.
>> Are you coders or whiners :) ?
>>
>> I also think lp:server-env-tools would be a good project candidate to
>> adopt
>> this module.
>>
>>
>> On 04/29/2014 01:28 AM, Antony Lesuisse wrote:
>>
>>> The v8 release is nearing and we recently moved the auditrail module to
>>> an
>>> extra addons repository.
>>>
>>> We now have the _track_field mecanism and with base_action_rules you may
>>> configure additional hooks to log events.
>>>
>>> The trunk version version auditrail is not just buggy it doesnt work at
>>> all on
>>> v8.
>>>
>>> The main reason is that we now call the orm directly inside controllers
>>> and
>>> templates, such calls dont pass anymore by the execute_cr layer. To fix
>>> auditrail we would need to proxy the osv.Model object.
>>>
>>> I think that _track_fields and base_action_rules are enough for most of
>>> the
>>> needs but it doesnt offer the same level of reporting as auditrail.log
>>> and
>>> auditrail.log.line.
>>>
>>> If someone wants to fix auditrail i would recommend following:
>>>
>>> - add a depends on base_action_rules
>>> - override _wrap_create and _wrap_write to call check_rules
>>> - remove the dirty monkey patching of execute below.
>>>
>>> If read logging is really needed you would need to wrap read and
>>> read_group
>>> aswell. One should be aware that read logging is not complete since v6.0
>>> as it
>>> doesnt log read_group.
>>>
>>> https://code.launchpad.net/openerp-extra
>>>
>>> I also moved project_long_term and document_* modules. For document_* i
>>> have
>>> made a proof of concept document_fs module that should cover most of use
>>> case
>>> of document_ftp/webdav.
>>>
>>> https://code.launchpad.net/~openerp-dev/openobject-addons/
>>> trunk-document-fs-al
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/28/2014 10:38 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello All.
>>>>
>>>> We are so surprised about the exclusion of the features given by
>>>> audittrail in
>>>> OpenERP.
>>>> Before make a public complain we exchange some comments with OpenERP
>>>> and I
>>>> want share with you the conclusions, but before create an opinion
>>>> matrix about
>>>> this change it is important for us answer this little survey
>>>> <https://es.surveymonkey.com/s/JJHCZRJ>[1] to make assumptions based
>>>> on better
>>>> and real arguments.
>>>>
>>>> Can you help us to help you?
>>>>
>>>> Regards.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://es.surveymonkey.com/s/JJHCZRJ
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> --------------------
>>>> Saludos Cordiales
>>>>
>>>> Nhomar G. Hernandez M.
>>>> +58-414-4110269
>>>> Skype: nhomar00
>>>> Web-Blog: http://geronimo.com.ve <http://geronimo.com.ve/>
>>>> Servicios IT: http://vauxoo.com <http://vauxoo.com/>
>>>> Linux-Counter: 467724
>>>> Correos:
>>>> nhomar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:nhomar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> nhomar@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:nhomar@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> twitter @nhomar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>



-- 
--------------------
Saludos Cordiales

Nhomar G. Hernandez M.
+58-414-4110269
Skype: nhomar00
Web-Blog: http://geronimo.com.ve
Servicios IT: http://vauxoo.com
Linux-Counter: 467724
Correos:
nhomar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
nhomar@xxxxxxxxxx
twitter @nhomar