IRC logs of #tryton for Monday, 2013-11-18 #tryton log beginning Mon Nov 18 00:00:02 CET 2013
-!- priyankarani(~priyanka@ has left #tryton09:43
priyankaranicedk: hi.. for tryton 3.0  if "active" field is set to False for any record, would we get that record in search() on that model ?09:46
-!- priyankarani(~priyanka@ has left #tryton09:47
Piloupriyankarani: no but it seems you could modify the context for that (active_test)09:57
-!- vcardon( has left #tryton10:01
priyankaraniPilou: is it mainly after 2.8 ? as in 2.8 search doesnt returns inactive records.10:08
Pilouas far as i known, it's like this since several versions, this behaviour was not modified between 2.8 & 3.0.10:13
rmupriyankarani: there was a bug in tryton 3.0, see issue344210:18
jeancavallocedk: Is it normal that the prefix / suffix fields on sequences is now mandatory ? I use xml to create default sequences, and I have errors all around.11:23
cedkjeancavallo: no11:26
jeancavallocedk: Checking this out at the moment, but it looks that check_prefix_suffix now fails if nothing is set11:27
jeancavallocedk: My bad, I did not notice the => today API change11:33
Piloujeancavallo: maybe you could mention it on a new page "Migration 2.8 -> 3.0" (
jeancavalloPilou: I do not know. I called it API change, but it is a new optional argument. Do you think it worths it ?11:42
jeancavalloPilou: And it is more 3.0 => 3.2 :)11:42
Pilouyes, it is worth it11:45
jeancavalloPilou: Do I need a special habilitation to push on the wiki or is it just me messing up google's double auth ?12:05
Piloujeancavallo: you should ask to cedk (
priyankaranilooks like the active field functionality is broken or something is wrong with the write method12:43
priyankaranii have written a test for the project module and it seems to showing weird results and the same things works with 2.812:44
rmupriyankarani: see bug / issue 3442.12:45
priyankarani@rmu this does not seem to be the same and I am testing with the version of tryton which has the patch included12:46
priyankaranion setting the active field to false in one of the records, all records seem to be set to false12:46
priyankaraniand its weird to see boolean fields return 0 and 1 instead of False and True12:46
rmuthe symptoms i got were similar, but they have gone with the patch of said issue. have no idea then. sorry for the noise.12:48
sharoonthomaspriyankarani: it looks like some issue with the python-sql change if it does not happen in 2.8 but happens in 3.0. can you try running the test with postgres.12:54
PilouCould an integer field  be used for _rec_name ?15:23
cedkPilou: it will probably fail on searching15:26
cedkpriyankarani: please fill an issue with your test case17:22
-!- priyankarani(~priyanka@ has left #tryton18:58
-!- pablovannini(~pablo@ has left #tryton19:16
-!- fireglow(fireglow@unaffiliated/fireglow) has left #tryton21:27

Generated by 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!