2013/12/12 Raphaël Valyi - http://www.akretion.com <[email protected]>
> As for having a city m2o country, well at least for us we don't need it. I > think the problem might more be with Vauxoo and Savoir Faire who opted for > a m2o to the country before I said I would need it to the state. Just to point correctly my friend. We have the implementation state > city clean model. http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~openerp-mexico-maintainer/openerp-mexico-localization/7.0/view/head:/city/res_city.py Regards. PS: We didn't include in our base_stuff:l10n because we always think it is generic enought to be reused, even we use the city in l10n_mx for some features in 4 more countries. Here we need a TDD sprint because with BOTH modules the compatibility is broken. In data Model. from the city proposed by Savoire and In hidden leak of sync in base_location and In the zip/city mandatory behavior in base_location. IMHO the original MP should be: 1.- Called base_city_state module "Not base location" with only State < City (with city_id relation) 2.- Implementation of synchronization features for the new res.partner model. 3.- TESTs to verify all compatibilities with i.e: crm In the middle: @maxime, are you agreed if we manage city as it is in an extra branch.? @raphael, can we prepare the new approach? Somebody else implement already another solution? regards. -- -------------------- Saludos Cordiales Nhomar G. Hernandez M. +58-414-4110269 Skype: nhomar00 Web-Blog: http://geronimo.com.ve Servicios IT: http://vauxoo.com Linux-Counter: 467724 Correos: [email protected] [email protected] twitter @nhomar https://code.launchpad.net/~savoirfairelinux-openerp/partner-contact-management/city-move/+merge/196023 Your team Savoir-faire Linux' OpenERP is subscribed to branch lp:~savoirfairelinux-openerp/partner-contact-management/city-move. -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~savoirfairelinux-openerp Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~savoirfairelinux-openerp More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
