savoirfairelinux-openerp team mailing list archive

[Nhomar - Vauxoo <nhomar@xxxxxxxxx>]

2013/12/12 Raphaël Valyi - http://www.akretion.com <rvalyi@xxxxxxxxx>

> As for having a city m2o country, well at least for us we don't need it. I
> think the problem might more be with Vauxoo and Savoir Faire who opted for
> a m2o to the country before I said I would need it to the state.


Just to point correctly my friend.

We have the implementation state > city clean model.

http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~openerp-mexico-maintainer/openerp-mexico-localization/7.0/view/head:/city/res_city.py

Regards.

PS:
We didn't include in our base_stuff:l10n because we always think it is
generic enought to be reused, even we use the city in l10n_mx for some
features in 4 more countries.

Here we need a TDD sprint because with BOTH modules the compatibility is
broken.

In data Model. from the city proposed by Savoire and
In hidden leak of sync in base_location and
In the zip/city mandatory behavior in base_location.

IMHO the original MP should be:

1.- Called base_city_state module "Not base location" with only State <
City (with city_id relation)
2.- Implementation of synchronization features for the new res.partner
model.
3.- TESTs to verify all compatibilities with i.e: crm

In the middle:

@maxime, are you agreed if we manage city as it is in an extra branch.?
@raphael, can we prepare the new approach?

Somebody else implement already another solution?

regards.


-- 
--------------------
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

https://code.launchpad.net/~savoirfairelinux-openerp/partner-contact-management/city-move/+merge/196023
Your team Savoir-faire Linux' OpenERP is subscribed to branch lp:~savoirfairelinux-openerp/partner-contact-management/city-move.