IRC logs of #tryton for Thursday, 2012-05-10 #tryton log beginning Thu May 10 00:00:01 CEST 2012
2012-05-10 09:34 <sisalp> hello
2012-05-10 09:34 <sisalp> what does mean "change accelerators" in the tryton menues ?
2012-05-10 09:36 <bechamel> sisalp: accelerators are shortcuts
2012-05-10 09:37 <udono> sisalp: hi, when it is activated, the user can change the keybord shortcuts of the menu entry.
2012-05-10 10:01 <sisalp> bechamel: udono: thank you
2012-05-10 10:03 <sisalp> an other one
2012-05-10 10:04 <sisalp> when I use analytic accounting, I get AnalyticRoot as the label of the field
2012-05-10 10:04 <sisalp> wher I must indicate the Analytic Account
2012-05-10 10:04 <sisalp> is there a reason behind this ?
2012-05-10 10:05 <udono> sisalp: for analytic account you can produce an individual chart of accounts.
2012-05-10 10:05 <yangoon> JFTR: Tryton Debian packages are uploaded: latest 2.2 to unstable/testing, 2.4 to experimental
2012-05-10 10:06 <udono> sisalp: the accounts there are AFAIK not related to the main chart of accounts
2012-05-10 10:08 <sisalp> udono: I agree, in fact my question is about the field label "AnalyticRoot" where I expected "Analytic Account"
2012-05-10 10:12 <udono> sisalp: it is the root account of the chart, which means it has no parent account and is type view AFAIK
2012-05-10 10:14 <udono> sisalp: it is a similar conception as in the account module
2012-05-10 10:15 <sisalp> udono: no I set here the real analytic account, view accounts in particular view is not proposed, which is good
2012-05-10 10:16 <sisalp> in particular root, I mean
2012-05-10 10:16 <bechamel> sisalp: the field label is dynamic, it's the name of the root account
2012-05-10 10:17 <bechamel> sisalp: actually if you create several analytic charts, you will see several label/field
2012-05-10 10:18 <sisalp> bechamel: ok, understood. It means "analytic account in AnalyticRoot chart. Ok ?
2012-05-10 10:19 <bechamel> sisalp: yes
2012-05-10 10:19 <sisalp> this is excellent. The point is to provide the good name for root account
2012-05-10 10:19 <bechamel> sisalp: the main problem is that "AnalyticRoot" is not well chosen
2012-05-10 10:20 <sisalp> once understood, it is quite simple ;-)
2012-05-10 10:20 <bechamel> sisalp: :)
2012-05-10 10:21 <sisalp> since we are on this topic, can we modify the tree structure when analytical accounts are already in use ?
2012-05-10 10:21 <sisalp> and can we move a account from one tree to another tree ?
2012-05-10 10:22 <sisalp> will journals be ok after that cooking ?
2012-05-10 10:22 <bechamel> sisalp: I don't think there are constraint on it
2012-05-10 10:22 <bechamel> sisalp: I don't know for journals
2012-05-10 10:24 <sisalp> there is a status below "draft, open, closed", I understan open and closed, but what is draft ?
2012-05-10 10:24 <sisalp> I mean on the analytica account form
2012-05-10 10:27 <sisalp> and we (testing with jcm ) don't find analytic journals
2012-05-10 10:28 <udono> sisalp: no idea.
2012-05-10 10:30 <sisalp> udono: I guess there no analytic journals, analytic is probably driven by general accounting journals
2012-05-10 10:31 <udono> sisalp: yes, possible, but never tested.
2012-05-10 10:35 <udono> cedk: I am looking for integrating some test environment locally. I choose buildbot for running the tests. But I have a minor problem with the reuse of the testscript of trytond. The does not return a result of the test But I need a result to decide if the tests fails or succeed. Any idea?
2012-05-10 10:36 <sisalp> I turned my account to "opened" and don't see what is different, even list cannot be filtered by this status
2012-05-10 10:38 <udono> cedk: Is it possible to give the testscript a result, like return the number of fails get from TestResult Or will it break some other use of the testscript?
2012-05-10 10:38 <sisalp> as any openerp-contaminated person, I'm looking for a way to evaluate costs from timesheets and compare/consolidate with analytical accounting
2012-05-10 10:39 <sisalp> any idea how tryton would be able to help here ? I suppose a different standpoint, but where to dig ?
2012-05-10 10:43 <sisalp> my understanding is that we cannot add "analytic-only" entries like timesheet avaluation
2012-05-10 10:43 <bechamel> sisalp: in Tryton project are not analytic acount (or vice-versa), so to allow comparison we miss a module that links the two concepts
2012-05-10 10:45 <sisalp> bechamel: do you mean an extension of project to 1) evaluate costs from timesheets 2) make a consolidated repport with related analytic accounts ?
2012-05-10 10:48 <bechamel> sisalp: now that I think of it there is already a module to define cost on employee
2012-05-10 10:48 <bechamel> sisalp: project_revenue
2012-05-10 10:51 <bechamel> sisalp: which adds cost on employee and a list price on work, and computes the revenue
2012-05-10 10:52 <sisalp> the cost you mean
2012-05-10 10:52 <sisalp> or the potential to be invoiced revenue ?
2012-05-10 10:55 <bechamel> sisalp: revenue is (number of hours) * (list price)
2012-05-10 10:56 <sisalp> so maybe it is more or less an extra report to get the big picture by project
2012-05-10 10:57 <bechamel> sisalp: yes
2012-05-10 10:58 <cedk> udono: normally, you must use a library that will generate a test result file
2012-05-10 10:58 <sisalp> bechamel: from the code, even me ;-), can see it should compute the cost too. Which is what we are looking at now
2012-05-10 11:01 <udono> cedk: I do not understand. Do I need to duplicate and give it the return I need?
2012-05-10 11:02 <udono> cedk: but maybe I can just import the parts I need...
2012-05-10 11:02 <bechamel> sisalp: the code is the thuth
2012-05-10 11:02 <bechamel> :)
2012-05-10 11:03 <udono> bechamel:
2012-05-10 11:04 <bechamel> udono: yes *truth
2012-05-10 11:04 <sisalp> udono: excellent ;-)
2012-05-10 11:06 <bechamel> it wasn't made on purpose, I promise :)
2012-05-10 11:13 <cedk> udono: upackage like unittest-xml-reporting
2012-05-10 11:18 <sisalp> on project, I have the state opened and closed. Does it mean I create it closed to prevent using it until it is set up ?
2012-05-10 11:19 <sisalp> I would have expected "draft" here
2012-05-10 17:22 <__efx__> hello,
2012-05-10 17:23 <nicoe> __efx__: hello
2012-05-10 17:23 <__efx__> have you ever used proteus to communicate with the trytond ?
2012-05-10 17:24 <sisalp> __efx__: yop
2012-05-10 17:25 <__efx__> after having added an entry with proteus I got an InternalError: current transaction is aborted, commands ignored until end of transaction block
2012-05-10 17:25 <sisalp> __efx__: in a script prepared by B2CK, I'm not an expert
2012-05-10 17:25 <__efx__> It looks like the connection did not close after I added the entry in the database
2012-05-10 17:36 <udono> __efx__: without details it is hard to help
2012-05-10 18:02 <__efx__> I removed my database and recreate a new one and know it works, don't know what was wrong but that wasnt proteus
2012-05-10 18:12 <nicoe> __efx__: It will be hard to help you since we don't know anything about your script, yor server and that now everything runs fine
2012-05-10 18:15 <__efx__> I use the tryton v 2.2 in conjunction with proteus v 2.2. I have the version 9.1 of postgresql and the script I used is the 4 line example from the documentation of proteus
2012-05-10 18:16 <nicoe> really strange
2012-05-10 18:18 <udono> __efx__: Maybe the proteus documentation is aged. You can find some inspirations here:
2012-05-10 18:21 <udono> __efx__: Would be great when you open an issue if you detect mistakes in the proteus documentation.
2012-05-10 18:25 <__efx__> I had problem because of a version mismatch, I use gnuhealth modules which still need the version 2.2 of trytond AND the version 2.2 of proteus to
2012-05-10 18:31 <udono> __efx__: Yes, client, server, modules and proteus needed to be from the same branch
2012-05-10 18:54 -!- Mayank(~mayank@ has left #tryton

Generated by 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!