IRC logs of #tryton for Tuesday, 2012-01-10 #tryton log beginning Tue Jan 10 00:00:01 CET 2012
2012-01-10 08:42 -!- plantian( has left #tryton
2012-01-10 10:25 <jcm> hi, the Party search bar is less powerful than the sale field completion (for search by second word for instance). I'm not sure it's related to
2012-01-10 10:25 <jcm> What would be the way to improve this?
2012-01-10 11:22 <sisalp> jcm: I don't think it is related to the bug which is about full-text search iiuc
2012-01-10 12:59 <ciupicri> sharkcz, is there a tryton 2.2 repository for Fedora 16 (or Enterprise Linux 6)?
2012-01-10 13:03 <emma> hi :)
2012-01-10 13:03 <emma> I'm trying to make a custom invoice report for tryton
2012-01-10 13:04 <emma> I'm using the latest version from mercurial
2012-01-10 13:04 <emma> So I went to Administration => user interface => actions => reports
2012-01-10 13:06 <emma> Created a new record (name: Ls-Invoice, model: account.invoice, internal name: account.lsinvoice)
2012-01-10 13:07 <emma> I put "invoice/invoice.odt" as path and "company/header_A4_ls.odt" (my custom presentation) as style
2012-01-10 13:07 <emma> saved everything but it didn't appear in the reports for invoices
2012-01-10 13:08 <cedk> emma: you must create a keyword action for the new report
2012-01-10 13:09 <emma> so I thought maybe I should create an action... and When I tried to create my action, tryton told me that the field "Type" was required, but there is no such field in the action form
2012-01-10 13:10 <emma> @cedk: I tried, but there is no "type" in the action form, am I looking at the right place?
2012-01-10 13:13 <cedk> emma: no, by creating a report, you already create an action
2012-01-10 13:13 <cedk> emma: find your report in the action list and then you will see the keywords list
2012-01-10 13:16 <emma> cedk: ok, found it
2012-01-10 13:18 <cedk> emma: you can look at the other invoice report to see what to enter
2012-01-10 13:18 <emma> cedk: I created a "Print form" keyword on invoice, but it didn't change anything
2012-01-10 13:23 <cedk> emma: you must close and reopen the tab
2012-01-10 13:23 <emma> cedk: I did that :)
2012-01-10 13:25 <cedk> emma: I think there is a cache, you should also restart the server
2012-01-10 13:26 <emma> cedk: Thanks, I restarted the server and the client and now it works
2012-01-10 13:30 <cedk> emma: you could create an issue in the bugtracker because normally there is code the clean the cache but it seems it doesn't work properly
2012-01-10 13:33 <emma> cedk: ok, I'll do that
2012-01-10 13:40 <emma> cedk: issue #2387
2012-01-10 14:02 <version2beta> cedk, nicoe: I am looking at using Relatorio. I've been trying to use XHTML2PDF based on ReportLab, and things just don't seem to do quite what I expect. Is Relatorio a good choice to generate a few invoices from a Python API?
2012-01-10 14:06 <cedk> version2beta: at least, it is what we think :-)
2012-01-10 14:07 <cedk> version2beta: but if you want a pdf generation, you should also use unoconv to convert odt into pdf
2012-01-10 14:11 <cedk> version2beta: unoconv is quite fast when running in background
2012-01-10 14:11 <version2beta> cedk: My primary spec calls for generating a PDF version of a client's statement, that they can download and save.
2012-01-10 14:12 <version2beta> cedk: I'll look at it more closely. Fast is good - 650,000 registered users. (I think less than 20,000 will actually use this part of the service though.)
2012-01-10 14:13 <cedk> version2beta: indeed the speed of generating 1 odt/pdf depends a lot of the number of pages it contains
2012-01-10 14:13 <version2beta> These are simple, one to two pages each. Not like a heavy tryton report.
2012-01-10 14:15 <cedk> version2beta: so it should not be a problem
2012-01-10 14:15 <cedk> version2beta: how much report/min ?
2012-01-10 14:16 <version2beta> cedk: I think it's an easy application. One report a minute might be the heaviest they ever, ever see. I was more concerned about using too big a library than too small.
2012-01-10 14:18 <cedk> version2beta: so it looks like relatorio is probably a good choice
2012-01-10 14:18 <sisalp> version2beta: good to see you back ;-)
2012-01-10 14:18 <version2beta> cedk: Excellent and thank you. I will give that a try!
2012-01-10 14:18 <cedk> version2beta: especially if you have a some layout design requirements
2012-01-10 14:19 <version2beta> sisalp: Were you following my medical challenges? I think I saw you tweet at me, through a drug-induced haze. Thank you! :-)
2012-01-10 14:20 <nicoe> version2beta: you're already back, that's impressive
2012-01-10 14:20 <sisalp> version2beta: I guessed more than I knew about and wish you the best for this year !
2012-01-10 14:22 <version2beta> sisalp, nicoe: I'm young, only 42, so it should be something from which I recover pretty quickly. They did four bypasses, but it's still the pain from the sternum that's primary. I had some complications after with delerium and fibrilations, but that lasted only a couple of days. And I have woken up coding in my dreams like every day since.
2012-01-10 14:22 <version2beta> sisalp: Thank you for the wishes :-)
2012-01-10 16:44 <sisalp> anybobye from nantic here ?
2012-01-10 16:44 <sisalp> anybody
2012-01-10 16:46 <cedk> sisalp: they are not big fan of irc
2012-01-10 16:47 <sisalp> I remeber their presentation of an online documentation system they presented at TUL
2012-01-10 16:48 <sisalp> and was trying to remember why we did not adopt it
2012-01-10 16:51 <cedk> sisalp: we did not
2012-01-10 16:51 <cedk> sisalp: just waiting for POC
2012-01-10 16:55 <sisalp> the demo was not a poc already ?
2012-01-10 16:55 <sisalp> proof of concept ?
2012-01-10 16:58 <cedk> sisalp: it is based on koo and OpenERP
2012-01-10 16:58 <sisalp> really ? ;-) I missed the point
2012-01-10 16:59 <grasbauer> hi
2012-01-10 17:05 <grasbauer> our client is updating his inventories: if he set a inventory to confirmed, the time to create a line takes about 3 seconds - mainly creating a account_move takes a lot of time - any suggestion what is causing this performance issues?
2012-01-10 17:06 <cedk> grasbauer: which account_move?
2012-01-10 17:09 <grasbauer> cedk: i was logging all calls to create in modelsql - the inventory is writing a record to account_move
2012-01-10 17:10 <cedk> grasbauer: which accounting stock module have you?
2012-01-10 17:11 <grasbauer> cedk: ah - ok - the accounting stocj module is involved
2012-01-10 17:12 <grasbauer> cedk: account_stock_continental
2012-01-10 17:16 <cedk> grasbauer: I don't see any thing that could be involved
2012-01-10 17:16 <cedk> grasbauer: but a lot of stuffs are done, so maybe it is the lowest time
2012-01-10 17:17 <cedk> grasbauer: anyway, when such things happens most of the time it is the amount of SQL queries that you should try to reduce
2012-01-10 17:18 <grasbauer> cedk: I do nothing ;) it's all done with standard modules
2012-01-10 17:18 <grasbauer> cedk: will investigate this
2012-01-10 17:19 <grasbauer> cedk: the creation of all stuff with 1 inventory_line is:
2012-01-10 17:19 <grasbauer> create stock_move 0.09
2012-01-10 17:19 <grasbauer> create account_move_line 0.06
2012-01-10 17:19 <grasbauer> create account_move_line 0.06
2012-01-10 17:19 <grasbauer> create account_move 1.44
2012-01-10 17:19 <grasbauer> create account_move 1.5
2012-01-10 17:20 <cedk> grasbauer: why is there 2 account_move created?
2012-01-10 17:21 <grasbauer> cedk: dont know - I'll will logg more infos
2012-01-10 17:21 <cedk> grasbauer: otherwise I guess it is all the check on account_move that slow the process
2012-01-10 17:24 <grasbauer> cedk: strange - the second call to create a account_move has no values.
2012-01-10 17:34 <cedk> grasbauer: look at the traceback
2012-01-10 17:38 <grasbauer> cedk: there is no traceback. The only issue for me: confirming an inventory with 336 lines takes 20 Minutes - the client is unusable in this time and the process consumes 100% cpu on the server
2012-01-10 17:40 <cedk> grasbauer: print it
2012-01-10 17:42 <grasbauer> cedk: will check this later - my partners are standing next to my table in sexy shorts asking me, what the hell I'm doing: we need to leave for a beachvolley game - we have a nice indoor place here - all trytonistas are wellcome for a match against grasbauer ;)
2012-01-10 17:43 <grasbauer> cedk: thanks so far back in 2 hours
2012-01-10 18:47 <sisalp> is sphinx a tool which is related to user documentation ?
2012-01-10 18:47 <cedk> sisalp: yes it is the documentation framework we use
2012-01-10 18:48 <sisalp> so I go and visit their site
2012-01-10 18:51 <cedk> sisalp: it will be also the framework for the new website
2012-01-10 18:53 <sisalp> there are many sphinxes on google
2012-01-10 18:54 <sisalp>
2012-01-10 18:56 <cedk> sisalp: yes this one
2012-01-10 19:01 <sisalp> I don't really understand what it does. I guess it is more than a rst-to-html tool
2012-01-10 19:02 <cedk> sisalp: no, it is what it is plus some features
2012-01-10 19:11 <sisalp> Sphinx seems to be a site generator from a set of reST files
2012-01-10 19:12 <sisalp> Result looks like a wiki, but it doesn't provide an online -editor backoffice
2012-01-10 19:13 <sisalp> so reST have to be created from another system of extracted from code.
2012-01-10 19:13 <sisalp> IAm I close to the truth ?
2012-01-10 19:13 <cedk> sisalp: yes, it is not a wiki
2012-01-10 19:13 <cedk> sisalp: wiki is not documentation
2012-01-10 19:14 <sisalp> do you mean wikipedia is not documentation ?
2012-01-10 19:15 <sisalp> mediawiki is a tool to edit on line pages of content
2012-01-10 19:16 <cedk> sisalp: hard to say, but they have rules that makes it close to
2012-01-10 19:17 <cedk> sisalp: but anyway, I'm speaking about software documentation
2012-01-10 19:19 <sisalp> Is there a benefit to write reST docs for users, process them with sphinx and publish ? over a vanilla wiki ?
2012-01-10 19:19 <sisalp> what differs between software and user doc ? Is software doc extracted ?
2012-01-10 19:20 <cedk> sisalp: I don't know what you are talking about
2012-01-10 19:20 <sisalp> today tryton uses a wiki and moves to sphinx, correct ? There is a benefit behind this
2012-01-10 19:21 <cedk> sisalp: no, we use sphinx since day 1
2012-01-10 19:21 <cedk> sisalp: there was a wiki because somes did not want to spend time on writing correct doc
2012-01-10 19:22 <sisalp> ;-)
2012-01-10 19:23 <cedk> sisalp: also wiki was there initialy for blueprints etc.
2012-01-10 19:23 <sisalp> you mean you write reSt by hand
2012-01-10 19:23 <cedk> sisalp: it was never the goal to be a user documentation
2012-01-10 19:23 <sisalp> and then publish it as static pages
2012-01-10 19:23 <sisalp> thanks to sphinx
2012-01-10 19:25 <cedk> sisalp: yes
2012-01-10 19:26 <cedk> sisalp: I think there is some project that try to add online editing based on sphinx
2012-01-10 19:27 <sisalp> ok, clear to me now, thank you
2012-01-10 19:27 <Telesight>
2012-01-10 19:28 <cedk> sisalp: the main advantage to use rst (and sphinx) is to have the doc following the dev in the repository
2012-01-10 19:30 <jcm> cedk: I got answers today with my accountant for the type of accounts in account_fr. Do you prefer to receive theses precision as email or on the codereview ? I cannot translate correctly everything in english :/
2012-01-10 19:34 <sisalp> jcm: regarding account_fr : tryton-fr ?
2012-01-10 19:34 <cedk> jcm: in codereview in french
2012-01-10 19:34 <jcm> cedk: ok
2012-01-10 19:35 <jcm> sisalp: later, caus' now I go and practise some music ;-)
2012-01-10 20:09 <marc0s> i'm having trouble after upgrading from 1.8 to 2.0, when login in the migrated database.
2012-01-10 20:09 <marc0s> any hint on this? i imagin some missing icon file but... not sure
2012-01-10 20:13 <cedk> marc0s: ok tryton-users icon was removed
2012-01-10 20:13 <cedk> marc0s: I guess you use it in a custom module?
2012-01-10 20:14 <cedk> marc0s: if so, you can define it in your module like it is done in product module for tryton-product icon
2012-01-10 20:14 <marc0s> cedk: ok, i'll see
2012-01-10 20:15 <cedk> marc0s: wait, you update to 2.0 not 2.2 ?
2012-01-10 20:16 <marc0s> cedk: maybe is tryton-party someway related to tryton-users icon? that's the one i use in my module
2012-01-10 20:17 <marc0s> cedk: oops, aplogize, was reading another xml file; sure in mine there is, the tryton-users one
2012-01-10 20:17 <cedk> marc0s: indeed in 2.0, icons are not yet define in modules
2012-01-10 20:17 <cedk> marc0s: indeed I think we remove or rename it
2012-01-10 20:19 <cedk> ACTION bbl
2012-01-10 20:24 <coeps> hello everybody.
2012-01-10 20:27 <coeps> I was playing around with the tryton example hello world. Installation worked fine. However, I installed the module HelloWorld and thought why not change some labels ind the view type form <label name="name_label"/>. Unfortunately with the -u or the -i option of the server the correction is never updated but results in an broken view in the client (no labels...). Is an update of labels not possible or am I missing something important?
2012-01-10 20:28 <coeps> I was wondering if an update of an existing module is possible at all?
2012-01-10 20:34 <cedk> coeps: it is possible
2012-01-10 20:34 <cedk> coeps: it is the base of the framework
2012-01-10 20:34 <cedk> coeps: did you well define the xml in
2012-01-10 20:37 <coeps> I just used the example and it was working well. afterwards I just changed the view "hello_view_form" and changed the cdata-tag <label name="name"/> to <label name="name_labelxy"/>. Afterward I started the server with the -i option again. Then I found the -u option and updated into the same db without errors from the server. But then the view is not displayed with any labels at all afterwards.
2012-01-10 20:38 <cedk> coeps: did a field name_labelxy exist ?
2012-01-10 20:39 <coeps> no, I thought its just the label, the written text. But if you ask like that, i am probably wrong :)
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> This is how it looks after updating <![CDATA[
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> <form string="Hello">
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> <label name="name_xy"/>
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> <field name="name"/>
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> <label name="greeting"/>
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> <field name="greeting"/>
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> </form>
2012-01-10 20:41 <coeps> ]]>
2012-01-10 20:42 <coeps> and I thought i can just change the label of the displayed textfield-control from name to name_xy.
2012-01-10 20:47 <coeps> thanks for the help so far, but how do I change a label then?
2012-01-10 20:47 <cedk> coeps: first, please don't copy/paste in the chan but use a pastebin
2012-01-10 20:47 <cedk> coeps: you can display any string you want with label but you must use the attribute string instead of name
2012-01-10 20:47 <cedk> coeps: name attribute is for fields
2012-01-10 20:51 <coeps> Sorry, I will use a pastebin in future and thank you for the hint. I will try right away. By the way: is that the right place to ask questions like that or is there a better place to go?
2012-01-10 21:02 <cedk> coeps: no, it is the good place
2012-01-10 21:05 <coeps> I was trying, but did not succeed. What do you mean by attribute string. Can you please be so kind as to give me an example how to change the label? What of the xml refers to the field defined in the .py file and what part refers to the label in the form?
2012-01-10 21:08 <cedk> coeps: change for: <label string="New Label"/>
2012-01-10 21:47 <coeps> So, maybe I am to stupid for that, but when I change <label name ="greeting"/> for <label string="New Label"/>, i get an Invalid XML for View error. As I can take from the documentation the name Attribute is for using the default field-description. So the string should replace it?

Generated by 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!