| chat.freenode.net #tryton log beginning Mon Jul 23 00:00:01 CEST 2012 | ||
| 2012-07-23 07:47 -!- sharoonthomas(~sharoonth@122.177.181.249) has left #tryton | ||
| 2012-07-23 13:38 <marc0s> hi, is there any script around for migrating old translation csv files to the new .po ones? (i just wanted to ask before coding it myself) | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:10 <sampac> marc0s: I don't know the old csv system but you can export .po files with the translations as they stand in the database... | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:15 <cedk> marc0s: we did the migration by importing in the old system and than migrate the DB to the new one | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:16 <marc0s> sampac: thanks :) | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:17 <marc0s> cedk: yes, the point is that now i have no old DB with me module already installed, but i could do it that way ... | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:19 <cedk> marc0s: it is easy to create one :-) | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:20 <marc0s> cedk: sure :) just laziness | ||
| 2012-07-23 14:58 <marc0s> i ended up with this http://dpaste.com/774177/ if it's of interest to anyone | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:13 <sharoonthomas> cedk: there is a possibility for zero division error in project plan module if there are allocations with zero percentage assigned | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:13 <sharoonthomas> cedk: http://hg.tryton.org/2.4/modules/project_plan/file/271b05b66540/work.py#l139 | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:14 <sharoonthomas> cedk: can we consider this a bug ? and if so should the patch handle a zerodivisionerror or check if total_allocation is zero ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:17 <bechamel> sharoonthomas: IMO the fix would be to add a constrain on the percentage field | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:17 <sharoonthomas> bechamel: not letting 0% in the allocation ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:17 <bechamel> sharoonthomas: yes | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:19 <bechamel> this bug is there because when the module was written a required float meant also non-zero | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:20 <bechamel> but now a required field can be zero, so the constraint must be added | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:24 <cedk> bechamel, sharoonthomas: it is nicoe who forget this one during migration | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:25 <bechamel> nicoe: boooh! booh! ;) | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:25 <sharoonthomas> cedk: so will write a patch and send.. you will need a patch for both 2.4 and trunk ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:28 <sharoonthomas> ACTION won't it be better to have a `min` and `max` attribute on int and float fields which would validate when saving the record | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:29 <bechamel> sharoonthomas: this would make sense, but should be also implemented in the client | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:29 <cedk> sharoonthomas: only trunk because it can not be backported | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:29 <sharoonthomas> cedk: ok | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:29 <cedk> sharoonthomas: I think it must be domain | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:30 <sharoonthomas> bechamel: will it be difficult to have on client ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:31 <cedk> I think for domain support on non-relation field should be not too difficult | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:31 <sharoonthomas> cedk: an pylon already has gt, ge, lt, le | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:31 <sharoonthomas> s/pylon/pyson | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:34 <bechamel> the main difficulty is to have something user-friendly | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:34 <cedk> bechamel: field becomes red | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:38 <bechamel> cedk: you should have missed "user-friendly" in my answer :) | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:44 <cedk> bechamel: no | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:53 <bechamel> cedk: currently, red == missing. here we need to tell the user that the value is out of domain. This is different. | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:55 <cedk> bechamel: no, red == wrong | ||
| 2012-07-23 15:59 <cedk> bechamel: look at the domain inversion | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:00 <bechamel> cedk: so the user must guest the correct value by himself ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:00 <bechamel> *guess | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:02 <cedk> bechamel: yes | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:03 <cedk> bechamel: it is not optimal but I don't think it is possible to do better | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:07 <bechamel> cedk: a simple message would be useful, like we have for the constraints | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:08 <cedk> bechamel: not possible | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:08 <bechamel> ACTION thinks constraint and domains are the same things and should be merged :) | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:08 <cedk> bechamel: not possible | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:09 <cedk> bechamel: it is possible to express a constraint as a domain but not always | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:11 <bechamel> it's Possimpible ! (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Possimpible) | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:13 <bechamel> cedk: joke aside, why do you think that a custom message for domain is not possible ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:14 <bechamel> currently we show "Invalid form" under the title, what about a dynamic string | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:17 <cedk> bechamel: ok it is on impossible but will required a very much work | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:17 <cedk> bechamel: because you have to make a sentence out of a domain | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:18 <cedk> bechamel: or just show the domain | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:25 <cedk> and the domain could be showed like in the search box | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:25 <bechamel> cedk: no, the module developper must give an explicit message (just like the constraints, the framework doesn't make sentence from them) | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:26 <bechamel> cedk: actually, I like the idea of "translating" the pyson domain into something "readable" by the user | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:26 <cedk> bechamel: it is not possible | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:28 <cedk> bechamel: I don't think you understand how domain inversion work | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:30 <bechamel> cedk: I don't see why you talk about domain inversion actually | ||
| 2012-07-23 16:31 <cedk> bechamel: because it define a domain for each fields | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:28 <cedk> this http://bugs.python.org/issue15435 took me half a day to fix :-( | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:36 <bechamel> cedk: what should be the traceback ? | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:36 <cedk> bechamel: the one from property I think | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:38 <bechamel> cedk: but maybe __getattr__ is called when an AttributeError is raised, so there are no way to know which one to raise | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:40 <bechamel> cedk: it is not a bug but a feature | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:40 <cedk> bechamel: yes of course but I think it is wrong to call __getattr__ for a property | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:40 <cedk> bechamel: that's why I mark it as behavior | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:41 <bechamel> cedk: IMO it is the expected behavior :) | ||
| 2012-07-23 18:46 <cedk> bechamel: we will see |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!