openerp-expert-framework team mailing list archive

["P. Christeas" <xrg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thursday 06 January 2011, you wrote:
> Hello Dr.Ferdinand,
> 
> The tree view of account.move.line has been taken according to the
> overridden method fields_view_get() in the account.move.line object. So
> it takes the field's sequence dynamically and not according to the XML
> schema. Hope you will agree with this information. So I am closing this
> bug.

Indeed, it is not a bug, but a little-known feature of the 
"account.journal.view" usage.

However, I would vote to keep a "wishlist"-level issue open, to reconsider 
this perculiar feature in the future versions.

If we had a nice way[1] to specify per-record[2] views[3], we wouldn't need 
that "account.journal.view" and would better use a consistent framework 
feature instead.
Here, I don't question the need to have per-journal views, but the fact that 
we have a mechanism of view definition unique to the "account.journal" model.



[1] wink-wink
[2] but not the utterly ugly hack proposed, to pass active_id as a criterion..
[3] some rough examples are already in 6.0 with the "groups=" or "attributes="