IRC logs of #tryton for Monday, 2013-02-11 #tryton log beginning Mon Feb 11 00:00:01 CET 2013
2013-02-11 03:37 <sharoonthomas> is down!
2013-02-11 15:56 <shalabhaggarwal> cedk: Hi, I am trying to create a party from XML data but it always breaks saying ('UserError', (u'The value of the field "Account Payable" on "Party" is not valid according to its domain.', ''))
2013-02-11 15:56 <shalabhaggarwal> any ideas how to deal with it?
2013-02-11 15:57 <cedk> shalabhaggarwal: don't create party via XML
2013-02-11 15:58 <cedk> shalabhaggarwal: it is production data not programming data
2013-02-11 15:59 <cedk> shalabhaggarwal: so use an importation script written for example with proteus
2013-02-11 15:59 <cedk> shalabhaggarwal: like that you can configure it to use the right user with the right company etc.
2013-02-11 16:02 <shalabhaggarwal> cedk: lets say i want to create a carrier with my custom carrier computation module and carrier inherits from party
2013-02-11 16:03 <cedk> shalabhaggarwal: idem for carrier it is production data not programming
2013-02-11 16:46 <sharoonthomas> cedk: is down ?
2013-02-11 16:48 <cedk> sharoonthomas: then it is google
2013-02-11 16:48 <sharoonthomas> cedk: is it running off app engine ?
2013-02-11 16:48 <cedk> sharoonthomas: quota exceeded
2013-02-11 16:48 <sharoonthomas> cedk: apparently its an "OverQuotaError"
2013-02-11 16:48 <sharoonthomas> cedk: any way to get the quota increased ?
2013-02-11 16:50 <cedk> sharoonthomas: paying google
2013-02-11 16:51 <sharoonthomas> cedk: An item for the next foundation meeting then ?
2013-02-11 16:51 <cedk> sharoonthomas: but it is some crawler that make more than 1000 request in 24h
2013-02-11 16:51 <cedk> sharoonthomas: we got 16 IPs like that
2013-02-11 16:51 <sharoonthomas> cedk: crawler ? who would want to do that ?
2013-02-11 16:52 <cedk> sharoonthomas:
2013-02-11 16:52 <cedk> sharoonthomas: but doesn't seem to respect it
2013-02-11 16:53 <cedk> sharoonthomas: even there is one from Google
2013-02-11 16:54 <sharoonthomas> cedk: interesting
2013-02-11 16:55 <cedk> sharoonthomas: I will disallow every crawlers for everything
2013-02-11 16:55 <cedk> sharoonthomas: we don't care so much about referencing patches
2013-02-11 17:01 <cedk> sharoonthomas: new
2013-02-11 17:02 <sharoonthomas> cedk: its unto the crawler to respect/disrespect robots.txt, so blacklisting is probably the way
2013-02-11 17:03 <cedk> sharoonthomas: blacklisting is too complex, there are so much
2013-02-11 17:04 <sharoonthomas> cedk: paying seems to be the way out
2013-02-11 17:05 <cedk> sharoonthomas: I don't want to pay for robots
2013-02-11 17:08 <cedk> sharoonthomas: any way the foundation doesn't have the fund now
2013-02-11 17:08 <sharoonthomas> cedk: how much does it cost per month (approx) do you have any idea ?
2013-02-11 17:11 <cedk> sharoonthomas: min. $2.10/week
2013-02-11 17:11 <cedk> sharoonthomas:
2013-02-11 17:12 <cedk> sharoonthomas: but the best is to host the application ourself
2013-02-11 17:12 <sharoonthomas> cedk: any way you calculate, you will end up spending more time managing the application ourself
2013-02-11 17:13 <cedk> sharoonthomas: I'm not sure of that and any way time doesn't cost
2013-02-11 17:14 <cedk> sharoonthomas: and being out of Google == more freedom
2013-02-11 17:14 <sharoonthomas> cedk: i can pay for it, if you think its ok (till you have time to move it over or there is an alternate decision)
2013-02-11 17:19 <cedk> sharoonthomas: ok, I can make you an owner and then you should be able to setup the billing
2013-02-11 17:19 <sharoonthomas> cedk: thanks
2013-02-11 17:19 <cedk> sharoonthomas: what is you google account?
2013-02-11 17:19 <sharoonthomas>
2013-02-11 17:20 <cedk> sharoonthomas: done
2013-02-11 17:21 <sharoonthomas> cedk: got the email
2013-02-11 17:26 <sharoonthomas> cedk: i have added my card and enabled billing and the status says activating billing
2013-02-11 17:29 <cedk> sharoonthomas: ok
2013-02-11 17:35 <sharoonthomas> cedk: looks like its back up
2013-02-11 17:43 <cedk> sharoonthomas: quotas have been reset
2013-02-11 17:43 <sharoonthomas> cedk: yep
2013-02-11 22:16 <coeps> Hi, can someone give me a hint. Whats the sense of sequence types - related to sequences?
2013-02-11 22:22 <coeps> From the examples, I bind both to a field in a model. Can I just add more sequencefields to a type? But if yes, why is the type bound to a field?
2013-02-11 22:57 <katr> coeps: What do you mean by "you bind them to a model"?
2013-02-11 22:58 <katr> coeps: You can have multiple sequences for a model, e.g. FiscalYear has more than one sequence.
2013-02-11 23:04 <coeps> katr: in module party party.xml I have two records ir.sequence.type and ir.sequence with the fields name> party<.. and code><. What do I need the type for?
2013-02-11 23:07 <coeps> What I mean is, that the sequence and the type reference (bind) the same field, model.
2013-02-11 23:08 <coeps> Maybe its easier if you just could tell me what sequence type is for. .)
2013-02-11 23:12 <katr> coeps: I think it will be become clear what the types are for if you have a look at "Administration -> Sequences"?
2013-02-11 23:13 <katr> Or at the sequence model ir/
2013-02-11 23:19 <coeps> katr: I did that for sure, but I still miss the relation between the type and the sequence. Is the type just for acess control?
2013-02-11 23:20 <katr> I think the misunderstanding is that the sequence is not "bound" to any model at all. You can have a relation field (Many2One) like to any other object but that is not necessarily the case.
2013-02-11 23:21 <cedk> coeps: yeps it is just for access control and prevent mistake when selecting a sequence
2013-02-11 23:23 <katr> coeps: Yes, I would say it just gives another model the possibility to enforce the type of the underlying sequence if you want to make the sequence selectable.
2013-02-11 23:31 <katr> coeps: E.g. the party module adds a sequence type with the code "" and a sequence with that code. In it forces the sequence to have the code "" with the domain clause.
2013-02-11 23:32 <coeps> cedk,katr: Thanks a lot for your help, I am still not sure I understand it completely. I will think and play with it tomorrow, right now I am gaga :). I might bother you again with that stuff ;)
2013-02-11 23:35 <cedk> coeps: I must say the current design is not the properest, it comes from legacy of OpenERP
2013-02-11 23:35 <katr> coeps: In case of parties it doesn't make much sense, but if you have a look at e.g. the accounting module which has different sequences for different fiscal years it makes perfect sense.
2013-02-11 23:36 <cedk> coeps: it was already rework a little bit to make it functional but there are rooms for improvement and clarication
2013-02-11 23:37 <katr> coeps: E.g. it's always the same code 'account.move' (type) but the actual sequence changes from year to year.
2013-02-11 23:38 <coeps> cedk: What I see so far from Tryton, you guys will come up with a perfect solution soon. I really think that framework is awesome.
2013-02-11 23:39 <cedk> coeps: it will be perfect when there will be nothing to remove
2013-02-11 23:42 <coeps> cedk, katr: While trying to get the sequencing right, I struggle with the the following error: 'coeps_saccounting.configuration' is not in list'- From that little info, can you give me a hint where to start debugging. ? Just a hint, nothing more :)
2013-02-11 23:44 <coeps> It comes from the xml and is thrown in the client when clicking the menu entry, where a form is bound to
2013-02-11 23:44 <cedk> coeps: I guess it is the list of the reference field
2013-02-11 23:46 <coeps> cedk,katr: Thank you for your time.

Generated by 2.17.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!