IRC logs of #tryton for Friday, 2009-02-06 #tryton log beginning Fri Feb 6 00:00:01 CET 2009
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1341:220295b983f4 trytond/trytond/osv/ Fix search in reference to allow inactive records00:54
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1342:1379f56cd204 trytond/trytond/ Use cursor query to display wrong SQL00:54
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 401:5d28409f0760 stock/
CIA-10tryton: Check context value in get_quantity on stock.location00:54
CIA-10tryton: Verify that the product id from context has a real product record00:54
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 402:1a2d3bb157eb stock/ Check context value in view_header_get on stock.location00:54
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 265:939a5a35e9ef website/ (7 files in 6 dirs): Remove ohloh javascript to speed up load of page01:23
-!- vengfulsquirrel( has left #tryton02:38
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton03:36
-!- yangoon1( has joined #tryton05:19
-!- johbo( has joined #tryton05:25
-!- bechamel(n=user@ has joined #tryton07:48
-!- sharkcz( has joined #tryton07:49
-!- snowch(n=snowch@ has joined #tryton07:51
CIA-10tryton: udono roundup * #769/UnboundLocalError: local variable 'object_id' referenced before assignment: [new] This error happens on installing stock module in 1.0 [Thu Feb 05 18:13:43 2009] ERROR:init:Error while parsing xml file: In tag record: mode ...07:54
-!- Timitos(n=Timitos@ has joined #tryton07:56
-!- snowch(n=snowch@ has left #tryton07:59
-!- Gedd(n=ged@ has joined #tryton08:05
-!- paola( has joined #tryton08:34
-!- cristi_an(i=5978d3ce@gateway/web/ajax/ has joined #tryton08:38
cristi_anbechamel: why invoices are by defautl without taxes ?08:38
cristi_anbechamel: most of invoices 90% have to include taxes (vat) no ?08:39
cristi_anfor customers in the same country.08:39
bechamelcristi_an: taxes come from products, so you must add taxes on products first08:40
cristi_anand taxes on the invoice are ?08:40
cristi_anthere is some add taxes08:40
cristi_anthose do not come by default from products08:40
bechamelcristi_an: you defined taxes on products and they don't appear on the invoice ?08:42
cristi_anlet me recheck08:42
CIA-10tryton: bch roundup * #769/UnboundLocalError: local variable 'object_id' referenced before assignment: [chatting] This patch corrects the bug, this reflect the same code in the trunk. I don't know if the patch is not already planned.08:45
cristi_anon demo08:49
cristi_ani defined08:49
cristi_anupdate tax on product A08:49
cristi_anfor customers i put like tax = 19%08:49
cristi_anbut when i do the invoice08:49
cristi_antax = 008:49
cristi_andespite it aqpper on left bottom small table with taxes08:49
bechamelcristi_an: you talk about invoice with id 2 on ?08:52
cristi_anor 308:52
bechamelcristi_an: percentage on the tax is 0.008:53
bechamelcristi_an: the tax computation is not based on the tax name :)08:53
cristi_anmaybe i defined it worng...08:54
cristi_anwhere can i change taxes08:54
bechamelcristi_an: fincancial mgnt > config > taxes > taxes08:55
cristi_anbechamel: thx08:57
cristi_anbechamel: one more thing08:57
cristi_ansequence what does represent there ?08:57
cristi_anon taxes08:57
cristi_anand childs ?08:58
bechamelcristi_an: it's for some advanceed usage, for example some eco-taxes need to be applied before any other tax (but i don't rememeber if the other taxes increase with the eco-taxe), another example is Quebec where tax are also complicated (quebec taxes are combined with candian ones)09:00
cristi_anbechamel: and sequence ?09:01
bechamelcristi_an: sequence is for the same purpose, but I don't exactly when to use child taxe or when to use sequence09:04
cristi_anA LOT09:06
udonobechamel: cristi_an: Good morning09:08
udonoIn germany we have some taxes with 0% taxfree. But we need them to show on invoices. Is this possible?09:09
udonoTimitos: ?09:09
cristi_anhi there09:09
bechameludono: is it not enough to put percentage to 0.0  ?09:10
udonoyes, percentage needed to be 0.0. But the Tax need to be shown as a '0% Taxfree invoice'.09:11
Timitosudono: yes. i think this is possible. but i have worked on that in the middel of the last year. so i do not remember if it really works09:11
Timitosudono: percentage can be 0.0. this has been changed by cedk on my advice09:11
Timitosbut i am not sure, if there is created a tax line for such a tax. must be tested09:12
udonoah, ok. Then I misunderstood cristi_an request in the demodatabase... Sorry09:12
cristi_anudono: thx09:14
bechamelTimitos, udono:  yes a tax line is created when percentage is 0.0 (the problem of cristi_an was precisely that the tax was created but the amount was still 0)09:14
Timitosbechamel: udono: so for me everything is correct09:15
cristi_anit works ok09:17
cristi_ani was not pyed attention when deinfing taxes09:17
-!- nicoe( has joined #tryton09:17
udonoOn a field in a view I can set the attribute search="1". Is there a way to pre set the search term? The behavior is like restricting a search with domains or search rules, but the user can change the entry himself.09:23
udonoBTW, it's a new topic not related to the previous discussion...09:25
-!- snowch(n=snowch@ has joined #tryton09:26
udonoExample: party_role defines Supplier, Customer, etc. On an Customer invoice it would be good, when I search for the party to be invoiced, that only partys shown with party_type=="Customer". But the user should be able to change or clear the search_term by himsef.09:27
-!- carlos(n=carlos@ has joined #tryton09:31
udonoThe same function can be used for account_types when choosing accounts on different places in Tryton. Often there are all accounts shown when only a small subset makes sense.09:34
bechameludono: there is no way to do this, either you put a domain on the field (but in this case the user cannot override it) or you leave it like that. but it's not possible to put default value on search fields09:36
Timitosbechamel: but something like a filter would be a nice feature. i already talked about that with yangoon too09:37
snowchbechamel: the refactored code is looking very nice!09:37
udonobechamel: So it's a feature request.09:38
bechameludono: yes it's a feature request, but nothing prevent you from adding it to the tracker09:39
udonobechamel: yes, on the way :-)09:39
bechamelsnowch: most of the refactoring is made by cedk09:39
snowchbechamel: will references to psycopg2 in places like be refactored to backend?09:42
bechamelsnowch: yes09:43
CIA-10tryton: udono roundup * #770/Preselecting search terms in search views: [new] On a field in a view I can set the attribute search="1". Is there a way to pre set the search term? The behavior is like restricting a searc ...09:45
snowchbechamel: great! thanks for the info...09:45
bechamelsnowch: the funny think is that the psycopg stuff in is for exception around pooler method, but pooler itself has abstracted psycopg references, maybe one should ask cedk about this09:46
-!- simahawk( has joined #tryton09:49
snowchok, thanks.09:50
-!- snowch(n=snowch@ has left #tryton09:54
-!- cedk(n=ced@gentoo/developer/cedk) has joined #tryton09:55
-!- simahawk( has joined #tryton09:58
-!- Timito1(n=Timitos@ has joined #tryton09:58
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1343:72d96c1dcb74 trytond/trytond/osv/ Fix typo for issue76910:09
CIA-10tryton: ced roundup * #769/UnboundLocalError: local variable 'object_id' referenced before assignment: [resolved] Fixed. It was only on the mercurial version.10:10
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1521:224c5a40b3fb trytond/trytond/ (backend/ backend/postgresql/ Remove psycopg2 from server.py10:27
-!- enlightx( has joined #tryton10:53
-!- udono( has left #tryton11:23
-!- udono( has joined #tryton11:24
-!- oversize( has joined #tryton12:27
CIA-10tryton: ced roundup * #770/Preselecting search terms in search views: [resolved] It already exist. You must set in the field search_value of ir.action.act_window a dictionary with field names as key and search value ...12:32
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton12:32
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton13:09
-!- ikks_(n=igor@ has joined #tryton14:08
-!- Gedd(n=ged@ has joined #tryton14:13
CIA-10tryton: udo.spallek * r435 /wiki/ Edited wiki page through web user interface.14:16
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton14:37
udonoHi cedk, thanks for the great news on Is there some example in a Module for this?14:43
cedkudono: no14:53
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1176:cdec12877054 tryton/TODO: Add todo for default value on search fields14:53
cedkudono: I just add a todo to improve it with your idea of 'set default value'14:53
cedkudono: I think it will be better than what we have now14:54
-!- fp(n=fp@ has joined #tryton16:39
-!- cristi_an(i=5978d3ce@gateway/web/ajax/ has joined #tryton16:42
cristi_ani am late maybe bu thave you seen what nice site open erp done.16:43
cedkcristi_an: website still slow16:47
cedkcristi_an: some links failed16:47
cristi_ani did not noticved that....16:47
cristi_ananyway it is better to start being perfect16:47
cristi_anrather then ...only thinking...16:48
cedkcristi_an: stable version point to rc116:48
cristi_ani am glad for them as i would for tryton as well16:48
cedkcristi_an: there is no more community link16:49
cristi_anno link to foruim ?16:49
cristi_ani noticed that !!!!16:49
cristi_anthat is because they want to be paid ?16:49
cristi_anthat will be indeed ugly !!!!!!16:50
cristi_anvery ugly !!16:50
cedkand now they use also a google calendar :-)16:50
cristi_ani hope they will make up their minds16:51
cristi_anso no forum ????16:51
cristi_anforum gone ?16:51
cedkcristi_an: the documentation page has not the same menu then others16:51
cristi_anthere is forum and comunity on16:52
yangoon1it is under openobject16:52
cristi_anpen object16:52
cristi_anopen object16:52
cristi_ancu later guys16:52
cedkI don't see how they will limit the number of users in sold editions17:05
carlosAutomatic migration  NO17:13
carlosthat's why there is no migration script ;-)17:13
carlosyou need to buy such service17:13
nicoeYop, just to react, are they really gonna limit the maximum number of users ?17:16
carloscedk: it sounds more like a soft limit than a hard one17:16
carloswhat I don't really understand is the users vs accounts17:16
bechamelmaybe they will package the soft wihout source (and with their maintenance keys)17:16
carlosbechamel: it says they give the source code17:17
carlosOur Open Source licence gives you the guarantee that you will always be able: to use the software without any restriction, whether it is in time or in number of users or modules.17:17
bechamelcarlos: yes of course I answered to fast17:18
carlosso I guess they just give you support for cases when you only have a number of users17:18
carlosif you use more users or accounts than what you contracted, they will 'ask' you to move to the next package17:18
carlosbecause the only way to use a hard limit there is with ondemand17:19
bechamelcarlos: yes17:19
carlosand it doesn't look like an ondemand service, given that it's a fixed fee17:19
carloswell, this new information explains many things happening in the 5.0 development cycle17:20
bechamelI love how they justify the limitation of number of user: "With many users, maintenance is potentially difficult because we are then confronted with other problems like the rise in load." -> Ok but what about edition without limit ?17:21
carloswell, if I understand it correctly, they only support installations with 15 active accounts17:24
carlosat most17:24
nicoeaccording to me account == a user in the database, a user == a real person. Maybe they think that more than one person can use the same account17:24
carlosso if you have more than 15 users working at the same time, they don't cover you...17:24
carlosnicoe: do you think so?17:25
nicoecarlos: That's how I understand "With not confusing with the number of users! The number of accounts is the number of people which can " logged" on Open ERP."17:26
carlosok, I see it now17:26
carloshowever, I don't think they are assuming users will share accounts17:26
bechamelthe accounts on the user portal is for bug reporting/support17:26
nicoeor is it the other way around ?17:26
carlosbut that not all people in the company will use OpenERP17:27
carlosanyway, it seems to be a hiden way to impose license fees17:27
bechamelit's this instance (took from the source)17:27
fphello, just to react17:28
carlosbechamel: I guess that makes sense17:28
fpwe don't limit users or impose licences fees at all17:28
bechamelfp: hello, welcome on #tryton :)17:28
fpOpenERP is and has always been very open (unlike some comments I saw)17:28
fpThe only think which is per user is the maintenance service offers17:29
fpsimply because biggest companies does not need the same SLA than small companies17:29
fpthat's why we have 3 maintenance propositions17:29
bechamelfp: how will you enforce the number of user ? when the maintenance/support is made ?17:30
fpfor instance on the biggest maintenance proposition we guarantee 5 years of maintenance on stable version17:30
carlosfp: yeah, we more or less got the idea, but is a bit confusing the mix between users and accounts17:30
fpwe don't restrict number of users17:30
carlosfp: I think you should try to explain it a bit better so future customers get the idea17:30
bechamelfp: so what does mean "Up to 15 users" ??17:30
-!- igor__(n=igor@ has joined #tryton17:31
fpit's a contract17:32
fpso if they have more user, we don't guarantee the service17:32
fpwe provide17:32
-!- ikks_(n=igor@ has joined #tryton17:33
bechamelso is what carlos said before, to much user == no maitenance or edition upgrade17:33
carloswhich makes sense, just like per computer support contracts17:34
cedkas fixing seems just sending patches, I don't see the difficulty linked with number of users17:36
cedkand by the way OpenERP (TinyERP) has not been always very open: closed repositories, closed plugins17:38
bechamel.. restrictive licence for etiny17:38
carlosbechamel: I thought etiny is GPL17:40
fpcedk: we don't have closed plugins, they are opensource, we just have 2 plugins for shared funding17:41
fpplease stop crying everywhere openerp is not open this is not fair at all17:41
bechamelcarlos: no it was changed some time ago, you cannot remove the logo and the name from axelor and tiny sprl that appear on it17:41
fpyou must keep the openerp one17:41
fpwe provided a way to change the logo, you must just keep the openerp one17:42
cedkfp: I only say, not in the past17:42
bechamelfp: a way ? which one17:42
fpyou often had communication on this point to say openerp is not fully open17:43
cedkit is not only me17:43
fpyes, but you criticise Open ERP every week publicly17:44
fpI think it's not a good communication17:44
fpand not fair17:44
pantherai'm not so informed about all the stuff going behind; however,17:44
fpwe do disagree on lots of technical points17:44
pantheraas you probably know, i'm maintaining tinyerp in debian. and since 2005,17:44
fpbut we never criticied tryton (and I will manage so that we don't do it)17:44
bechamelfp: and by the way this licence ( ask you to reproduce it on the documentation, can you tell me where to find it ?17:45
pantheraall versions that were uploaded were completely free to debians understanding of free.17:45
pantheraso i personally don't buy the 'openerp is not (fully) free' license wise.17:45
fpI just want to avoid people trying to pass this message17:46
cedkpanthera: we don't speak about free but OpenSource17:46
nicoepanthera: I was wondering is the etiny case the same case as the firefox one ? Did you (or anyone from debian-legal) investigated this ?17:46
pantherafree, as debian understands/defines it, includes 'OpenSource'.17:46
pantheranicoe: not yet, etiny is still on my todo.17:46
cedkpanthera: so better word can be community17:47
nicoenicoe: but the case with the logo is it the same problem that was there with firefox or is it completely different. At first I though it was the same but there seems to be a way to change the default behavior17:48
nicoeSo I may review my judgment about the "freeness" of this licence17:48
bechamelfrom the licence "If you need commercial licence to remove this kind of restriction please contact us"17:50
fpSo I continue to emphasize that tryton always try to criticise Open ERP. Both products are good, so why criticising each others.17:51
fpI think it does not server the open source products17:51
fpit's better to criticise proprietary software if you prefer17:51
fpthat's a real market17:51
fpfighting each others will not server both products17:51
cedkfp: it is you who see a fight17:52
cedkand it is not because a product if open source that it is good17:52
fpthere is no fight because we don't reply. but you are often quite aggresive17:52
-!- ikks_(n=igor@ has joined #tryton17:53
fp(and I remember you that you tried to pursue me on the tribunal :)17:53
cedkfp: this is an other stuff and speak about that here17:53
cedks/speak/don't speak/17:53
bechamelfp: I don't understand you, you attacked cedric and me personnaly and now you came here to talk honey about open source ideal17:53
fpreally negative, and most of the time, I don't agree.17:53
cedknegative != aggresive17:54
fpI don't attack ? I just ask if we can be positive against both products ?17:54
carlosfp: I think bechamel talks about another conversation, at least I don't read that as he's taking current conversation as an attack17:55
bechamelfp: sorry but I don't trust you on this point, I'm not so stupid17:55
fpI think the best we have to do is to promote our softwares and reuse parts of each others17:56
bechamelfp: for me you only ask us to shut up, you don't care about fair open source collaboration17:56
cedkfp: if you respect our copyright wich was not the case may times17:56
fpcritism will not help boths products (and if we reply to your criticts, this will become a fight)17:57
fpadempiere was a catastroph on this point for both compiere and openbravo due to their communication17:57
bechamelfp: we had to ask you a lot of times to put our copyright when tiny took our code, and you only change this when we put the copyright infigement page online17:57
fpthe 3 products lost a lot of credibility17:57
fpI'd like to avoid this17:57
cedkfp: I don'T agree critism is always a chance to re-evaluation your point of view, you must take it like a chance17:58
-!- enlightx( has joined #tryton17:59
fpsorry, but lots of the critics are not fair. And, most of the time, you try to convince that openerp has a 'stupid' approach18:00
fpWe do not agree on lots of technical points, but we decided to not critics tryton but rather work and reuse your good points18:01
cedkfp: and we have arguments and discuss how to implement it in a better way18:01
bechamelwhy are you afraid of bad reputation? tiny is a so huge company with so huge customers , big dowloads, big user base, what harm a small project like tryton can do  ?18:01
fpIf you don't want to do the same I understand, sorry for disturbing.18:01
cedkwe discuss to have better ways so of course we argument each other about the pro and the con18:03
cedkso if you find it aggresive whe we say: this is not a good way because this and this18:03
cedkwe can not do anything for you18:04
cedkwe are always openned to discussion and we change our minds when somebody confinse us18:04
bechamelfp: and I can tell you that our criticism are very soft IMHO, we could have been far more aggressive18:05
cedkbechamel: no way, we talk only about code and features18:05
fpOk, bye.18:07
fpSee you may be at Fosdem18:07
cedkand by the way the forum on seems broken18:09
carloswow, I didn't know you had such huge conflict with fp18:10
nicoecedk: too late he's gone ...18:10
carloscedk: they are moving it from to so I guess something went wrong with the migration18:10
cedkcarlos: like often18:11
cedkcarlos: but fp will see this comment like an aggresive comment18:11
cedknicoe: do you go finally to fosdem?18:12
Timitosthe also have a irc chatlog on openerp now:
nicoeWell as I said to bechamel yesterday : no it's my girlfriend's birthday on sunday18:13
cedkTimitos: with irclog2html also :-)18:14
Timitoscedk: yes18:14
cedkTimitos: but I said to Tiny people that the code of conduct when you log irc is to display in the topic18:15
cedkTimitos: but they don't care18:15
nicoecedk: so I wont be there ... but if you happen to see Fabien give him a KISS (not a kiss) from me ;)18:15
Timitoscedk: don´t understand what you mean, but i think it is not so important for me to understand this18:16
cedknicoe: what is the difference18:16
bechamelnicoe: what's a KISS ?18:16
bechamelTimitos: read the topic of the chan18:16
nicoecedk, bechamel : Keep It Simple Stupid18:16
nicoecedk, bechamel : it was just for the joke ...18:17
cedkTimitos: I want to say that freenode people say if you log a chan, announce it in the topic of the chan18:17
Timitoscedk: ah. now i understood. thx.18:17
nicoecedk, bechamel : anyway, if I ever go to brussels (maybe late on sunday) I'll give you a call18:17
cedkTimitos: and by the way, when I ask if it will log the chan, they did not answer me18:18
bechamelwe forgot to ask fp how will be used the mysterious certificate number18:19
Timitoscedk: when did you ask? perhaps they wanted to hold the info back until today18:19
nicoeAnyway goodbye everyone ... have a nice weekend @FOSDEM18:19
cedkTimitos: at the begining of the week18:19
Timitosbechamel: you can ask him on #openobject perhaps?18:19
bechamelTimitos: maybe it's too aggresive :)18:20
Timitoscedk: perhaps :-)18:20
cedkTimitos: we already ask on openerp-fr, but they didn't want to answer18:20
cedkTimitos: but it is our fault, we are to aggresif :-)18:20
carlosbechamel: I think that number is to identify the modules that are 'certified' and thus supported18:20
carlosbut it's just a guess18:20
bechamelcarlos: what prevent the customer to change it ?18:21
cedkcarlos: yes, but the number seems to be randly generated18:21
Timitoscedk: i don´t mind about all that. we need to concentrate on tryton. this is my way of thinking18:21
carlosbechamel: well, I see it more as an ID more than a secret key18:21
carloscedk: ^^^18:21
cedkTimitos: I was just asking to see if it will be interesting for Tryton18:21
carlosjust like the UUID numbers18:22
Timitoscedk: i talked about the irc topic. i think you talked about the id topic now, didn´t you?18:22
cedkcarlos: but for that you have the version number of the module18:22
cedkTimitos: yes18:22
carloscedk: no idea, I'm just guessing ;-)18:29
carlosanyway, OpenERP is not using that field at all18:30
cedkcarlos: there is the code to generate a certificate18:31
carloscedk: so it's just an ID for their new QA process18:34
cedkcarlos: don't know, it is a very strange and obscure things18:36
carlosanyway, I don't think we need anything like that in Tryton18:36
carlosat least now18:37
cedkcarlos: for sure18:45
cedkcarlos: because we don't know what is the purpose of this18:46
carloscedk: well, from what I see (seems like it's really used in latest openerp trunk), it's a unique ID for the addons18:51
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton19:05
-!- juanfer(n=juanfer@ has joined #tryton19:28
-!- paola( has joined #tryton20:03
cristi_anguys i just read the long discussion with fp20:09
cristi_ani do no tknwo you ,but from what i see the guy is peacefully20:10
bechamelcristi_an: he peacefully refused to answer our questions20:20
-!- johbo( has joined #tryton20:33
CIA-10tryton: C?dric Krier <> default * 1522:049d59b06328 trytond/trytond/model/ ( Move _{update,rebuild}_tree from modelstorage to modeldb21:03
-!- johbo_( has joined #tryton21:24
-!- enlightx( has joined #tryton21:55
-!- johbo( has joined #tryton21:55
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton22:06
-!- Gedd(n=ged@ has joined #tryton22:13
-!- vengfulsquirrel( has joined #tryton22:20
-!- ikks(i=igor@ has joined #tryton23:44

Generated by 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!