On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:12 PM, Fabien Pinckaers wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We just follow the recommandation of the Free Software Foundation:
> - http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AssignCopyright
>
> Most of the good open source software publishers does this. As an
> example, here is the one
Hello community,
I'm unfortunately very busy right now, so here at Akretion we need to
discuss internally about that and give our position and suggestions.
Already I can tell that I'm very happy to see Fabien making such a proposal
to add some extra SaaS protective clause in license exception. Ind
Fabien,
sorry, to comment again:
> Yes, may be I should explain this mistake of mine.
>
> When I announced this, we found a solution that:
> - is compatible with AGPL
>
Sorry, but I think you are playing on words here: private modules are not
compatibles with many strict AGPL modules we have i
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Fabien Pinckaers wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > I even have a very personal question:
> >
> > did you guys at OpenERP SA anticipated those 2 issues:
> > 1) incompatibility between AGPL modules and private modules?
>
> No, we missed that point. When we understood we missed
Hello Fabien,
off-topic but related: today the following test [('foo_ids', 'contains',
'bar')] works with a name based on the name_search stuff. However, from my
quick tests if I remember properly, it doesn't work with an id such as
[('foo_ids',
'contains', id)]. Any chance when an id is provided
On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Fabien Pinckaers wrote:
>
> > off-topic but related: today the following test [('foo_ids', 'contains',
> > 'bar')] works with a name based on the name_search stuff. However, from
> > my quick tests if I remember properly, it doesn't work with an id such
> > as [('f
>
> If you do [('foo_ids', 'in', [id,id2])] on a one2many, it checks one for
> which an in id foo_ids is in (id, id2). So this is what you expect I guess.
>
> When you do [('foo_ids', '=', id)], I think it also searches for a
> one2many containing an id (not sure, to be tested), so this is also wha
And if you use --update because of some change that need to be propagated
into the database, make sure to select exactly the right module you changed.
Only this module and the depend ones (hopefully few if you are working on a
final layer extension properly) will be loaded, so it will be pretty fas
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Stefan Rijnhart wrote:
> On 15-09-11 19:02, Cuong Hoang Bui wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> OpenERP Medical project is now migrated to Tryton :( It's really
>> regretful. I think the main reason is related to license recently.
>>
>>
> Hi,
>
> the reasons cited for Medic
Hello guys,
We didn't had a chance to test it yet.
However, I would like to mention that here in Brazil we manage the payments
of all our implementations with the "account_payment_extension" extra
addons module instead of the account_voucher module.
If I'm correct, account_payment_extension inheri
ting account_voucher will
> probably involve a lot of rewriting so I haven’t decided if we can go down
> this route yet.
>
>
>
> Look forward to your comments once you get some time for testing.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Colin
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:
Hello,
I think ppa are a great way to make OpenERP installation more accessible o
the noobs. However, without source control management like bzr, according
to our experience it's pointless to imagine any real project according to
the current maturity of the project (improving a lot hose days howev
Hello,
Let me just weight behind Lionel:
demos and presentations don' really need to monopolize the precious time
people have the exceptional opportunity to meet physically: posting a blog
post, slides or videos over the Internet is perfectly adapted to
demonstrations. Actually doing it directly o
Hello Eric,
Basically, aside from the technical aspects of the synchronization, you
would have to deal entity by entity with the possible integrity errors
detected at the synchronization times.
If instead you opt for a transactional replication (or multi-master
transactional replication), that won
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:27 AM, Maxime Chambreuil <
maxime.chambre...@savoirfairelinux.com> wrote:
> extra-addons have been deprecated (it has been announced during the last
> community days). This is the reason why modules are moving out from it in
> specialized/vertical/localized projects, like
Hello Carlos and others,
I'm answering inline below:
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Carlos Liébana
wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> I don't see it either. It seems that now contacts are linked to the
> company itself (which may be correct in a lot of cases) but as you mention
> it should be possible
And it's more than that, in v7.0 all the screen layouts now relies heavily
on new HTML tags within the existing XML of the views, so you would have
lot's of trouble re-implementing/maintaining some GTK rendering engine.
For the very GTK die hard, I would rather suggest using Tryton instead
which pl
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Raphael Valyi wrote:
> Hello Eckhard,
>
> - HL7 integration (HL7 v3 or even better HL7 Fire
> http://hl7.org/implement/standards/fhir/)
>
Sorry to be off-topic, but to answer this specifically. Do you heard about
the Kettle ETL from Pentaho?
> You're losing the bzr history, which obfuscates useful data, disables
> cross-merges and makes back/forward porting of bug fixes painful.
> I humbly suggest you branch from 6.1 and mark the modules "installable:
> False" ? Then mark "installable: True" when the modules are ported to v7.0
>
> Lion
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Houssine BAKKALI <
houssine.bakk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't know if I have the right to vote but I vote for the option B
>
> But I don't agree with the following
>
> "Make a kind of rule that any module that is here (with installable =
> False) for more than le
By the way
a few more remarks about this branch v7 migration process:
- at Akretion we introduced the [MIGR] prefix on the commit messages to
explicit that a commit is dedicated to migrating to the new version of the
module dependencies (eg OpenRP 7). This is meant to make it easier to t
Hello,
I would like to say I agree 100% with what Bertrand said.
Also I think that when you reuse some existing module, it's appreciated
that you mention the module authorship. Free module authors aren't just
stupid people making free module in their free time, they often expect some
commercial r
Hello guys,
I agree with what Rodrigue, Frederic and a few other said. What we did in
the Brazilian localization is that in first approximation we map the
company yes/no with the is_company boolean. But then, when we have
is_company (or has contacts) set to yes, we allow setting an extra a fiscal
I was there, with only a few weeks of OpenERP behind me. AFAIR, the
> presentation that was made did not go too deep in the specifics.
> "Merging partner and partner address" probably could have been done in a
> saner way. I was not aware at that time of the issues this model change
> was supposed
>
>
> What I love in this one is the way it more or less use the same principle
> than ActiveRecord in Ruby, e.g. :
>
> client.ResUsers.create({'login': 'joe', 'name': 'Joe'}) or
> client.AccountInvoice.get(12)
>
And of course, since 2009, there is still OpenObject On Ruby, aka OOOR
https://githu
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Mario Arias wrote:
> Google is your friend... :)
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/openobject-addons/+bug/1086424
>
Sometimes a plain web Google search is a bit ineffective.
Here is a personal advice on how I manage my "personal OpenERP bug
knowledge base": I subsc
Hello Syllas,
the reason the 7.0 serie isn't created yet is that we don't want to create
false expectations while it's not 100% ready as today I would say that 80%
of the OpenERP Brazilian community members are already very illuded about
the maturity of OpenERP in Brazil (it's possible in a few si
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Raphael Valyi wrote:
> Hello Syllas,
[...]
>
>-
>https://code.launchpad.net/~extra-addons-commiter/openobject-extension/7.0
>
>
My bad, I should have said instead:
https://code.launchpad.net/~account-payment-team/account-payment/7.0
Hello community,
I think this threads totally deserves your attention:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/openobject-addons/+bug/1160365
Basically in OpenERP v7, business documents such as invoices can now have
their partner_id field pointing to a company contact res.partner record
while in previous vers
Hello folks,
just a few remarks:
at Akretion, in theory we totally support the Therp initiative and will try
to join efforts here as much as possible (yes we know we don't do enough
here yet sorry).
At some points we did many sacrifices to support OpenERP SA vision. Overall
we loose lot of effort
e each of them log the same bug if
> I could understand it and reproduce it.
>
>
> Ray.
>
>
>
> *From:* openerp-community-bounces+rcarnes=
> ursainfosystems@lists.launchpad.net [mailto:
> openerp-community-bounces+rcarnes=ursainfosystems@lists.launchpad.net]
> *
9 that the
> Invoice was created for the Company. I checked this in the database and
> compared the partner_id of the contact and the company.***
>
> *
> *The contact name is printed on the Invoice above the name of the
> company, but the Invoice is for the company. It shows up on the
On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Ray Carnes wrote:
> Invoices for Contacts will cause problems for my customers.
>
>
>
> If that is happening I want it fixed and can get them to all log the same
> bug.
>
>
>
> I can’t get OpenERP to Invoice a contact? How can I reproduce this so I
> can ask them t
Dear community,
with Renato Lima we were discussing the opportunity to modularize a bit
further our zip code management module for the Brazilian Localization.
In fact, what we did seems generic enough to provide a good basis for other
countries too (after further refactoring that should be pushed
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Ignacio Ibeas wrote:
> **
>
> Hello,
>
>
>
> I have proposed the merge with the city module:
>
>
>
>
> https://code.launchpad.net/~acysos-team/partner-contact-management/partner-contact-management-city-6.1/+merge/161635
>
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> Ignacio Ibeas
>
Than
Hello Peter,
that's cool. At Akretion we are also mirroring the main official repos on
Github. In fact we are even mirroring a few more branches like OCB ones and
RS-OCB ones (partner_id sematic not permuted):
https://github.com/akretion
This can be used for deploy or continuous integration testi
Hello,
I would like to say it again: Thank you CampToCamp and specially Joël for
all the paperwork and for assuming this initiative. No other OpenERP
integrator have such records of so many quality OpenERP open source
contributions during all these years. You guys rock!
With such a foundation Open
Hello,
yes in any case the specification and branch seems a serious step forward,
thank you for the hard work!
Will try to test more deeply in the coming weeks.
Regards.
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:09 AM, "Lionel Sausin, de la part de l'équipe
informatique Numérigraphe" wrote:
> Excellent!
> I'm
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Ana Juaristi wrote:
> +1 Davide Corio.
> I would separate community event from official event. I would propose even
> having more than only one day for it and if possible i would open meeting
> online to make possible participate anyone in the world even if they c
Also,
not everybody is using OpenERP for kidding. If you look at the integrators
successful with OpenERP, most of them are not just downloading modules
around: they are creating synergies between modules authors, creating new
branches of modules to comply with new OpenERP versions (v7?),
localizat
Hello Joël and all,
just a few comments regarding Akretion and our projects: we are likely to
ask a contributor agreement for a copyright grant to OCA for the major
projects we lead (for future contributions). We will probably ask that for
the ~20 localization modules for Brazil for instance as th
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
>
>
>
> 2013/9/10 Leonardo Pistone
>
>> Raphael,
>> I know very well you are a contributor, and I think most people do. If
>> you say you're willing to review somewhat soon, that's fine by me.
>>
>
> Same for me.
>
> No problem mantain Rap
Hello Joël (and others)
As you listed me among the "inactive" reviewers, here is my answer: yes
I've been less active recently as a reviewer. But I ask you to consider
that was temporary and not forget that I did crucial activities for this
project even recently.
Let me remind you that's me (with
!!
>>>
>>> The thread here is about having an OpenERP Community Reviewer team with
>>> active people in it. That's not the same. You do contribute a lot,
>>> everybody agree on that. But without any harm, you are not making review.
>>> That's 2 dif
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Mario Arias wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could someone please provide details on what is needed to try
> trunk-website-al branch?
>
> I tried to run it as normal trunk branch, but got a "Not Found" response
> instead of the create database wizard...
>
Hello Mario,
Well that'
Hello Joel,
+ 1 for adding the OCA board as admin.
And +1 for adding fellow Christophe Chauvet to the reviewer team.
And congratulation for all OCA work. I finally see a lot of quality coming
from that. And as v8 is also making efforts on quality so far (ORM+API
work, stock refactor), I see many
Hello,
just to mention we negociated for Aflex OPW renewal that o2m would be
sortable on client side, it has been written as one of the regression to
fix in the renewal contract to bought to OpenERP. So I think this is
related to this: when you click on the header column of a o2m table (like
sale
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Eric Caudal wrote:
> Hi everybody,
> Many email features in OpenERP7 are interesting and useful to follow-up on
> many objects (even though not absent bugs or issues).
>
> Nevertheless we tried to start using OpenERP as full corporate email
> client for a company
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> I agreed with 100% of the point mentioned by Eric and W.Martin
>
> IMHO: We just continue using our google apps the really good approach is
> that "It is not a message platform" IMHo try to figure out all this
> features wi
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Brendan Clune <
brendan.cl...@logicsupply.com> wrote:
> I agree. A database user is a better choice in this instance since it is
> easier to understand the effective permissions of that user. I think it is
> dangerous to encourage queries at the ORM level that by
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Markus Schneider <
markus.schnei...@initos.com> wrote:
> is there any list of 'interesting' OpenERP Branches like this one?
>
Welcome to the resistance ;-)
https://doc.openerp.com/contribute/02_working_in_teams/#community-contributor-teams
--
Raphaël Valyi
Foun
I see a lot extrapolations going here. But just to clarify a few things,
the OCA branches I mentioned here to answer Markus:
https://doc.openerp.com/contribute/02_working_in_teams/#community-contributor-teams
do not work against anybody. Instead they are very much complementary to
what the OpenERP
Speaking about the POS,
in case some of you think Twitter is just for kidding and missed the news,
here is a very complete overview of the technical part of it (hey
functionally a POS isn't that complex anyway)
http://thierry-godin.developpez.com/openerp/tutorial-module-creation-pos-modification-en
Hello,
just as a reminder,
I'm testing the installation of the main OpenERP modules (who wants a lunch
module anyway?) after every OCB commits on Travis-CI:
https://travis-ci.org/akretion/openerp-addons-ci/builds
Since the 2 months or so the tracking is in place it has always been green.
If not we
Hello,
I would like to see work to extract the tools that Christophe Chauvet from
Syleam made for Penthao to get easier access to properties in SQL into some
generic (server-tool branch?) base module
https://github.com/syleam/openerp-pdi-connector/tree/master/pdi_connector/sql
I think all reporti
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 6:57 AM, Yannick Vaucher <
yannick.vauc...@camptocamp.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I had a look on the trace from runbot on ocb branches.
>
> I'm afraid the issue is still there.
>
> It seems the module survey was creating the error.
>
> Here is a bug report to investigate it:
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 12:45 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
>
> 2013/10/25 Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero
>
>> I know too about runbot availability to run locally downloading source
>> code, but the added value of runbot is to have it on-line, as Travis CI
>> does. Anyway, I also see more interesting L
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Ronald Portier wrote:
> Personally I think that if the official branches are made less strict,
> in the sense that they accept database changes needed to resolve bugs,
> then there should be no problem to proceed along the lines proposed by
> Olivier.
>
> I think
Hello,
as a side note, I didn't test the feature yet, but it seems that OpenERP
trunk (future v8 in suprise roadmap) finally works around this workflow and
will update the database automatically if you touch Python defined objects
or XML records. The implementation is based on gevent notification.
Hello Michel,
alternatively, you can use that kind of Travis setting to get the exact
same runbot test suite running from Github:
https://github.com/openerpbrasil/l10n_br_core/blob/7.0/.travis.yml
https://github.com/openerpbrasil/l10n_br_core/blob/7.0/.travis_install_nightly.sh
https://github.com/
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Joël Grand-Guillaume <
joel.grandguilla...@camptocamp.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
>
> First thanks you Michel to take the time for that ! Now, I'm a bit
> concerned because we didn't really face this before.
>
> The
> https://code.launchpad.net/~openerp-community/ope
> Kettle 4.4?
>
> thanks!
>
> with kind regards,
> Sven Petersen
>
>
>
> *Von:* openerp-community-bounces+office=conexus...@lists.launchpad.net[mailto:
> openerp-community-bounces+office=conexus...@lists.launchpad.net] *Im
> Auftrag von *Houssine B
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Michel Meyer wrote:
> Hi Community,
>
> It seems that the module organization is a sensitive subject, but it's
> obvious that CVS organization is fundamental for good processes.
>
> If I can afford, personally i think 1 module = 1 repo should be the rule
> (in a p
Hello Joël,
yes please add it. When doing your devs, also please consider merging this
branch were we started improvement for v7:
https://code.launchpad.net/~akretion-team/openerp-rma/claim_rma_v7
We also have some pending improvement and extra modules in the pipe, but it
depends a bit if one of
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Mario Arias wrote:
> Fabien, Antony...
>
> Great job so far!
>
> Quick questions... we will need some kind of "light user" for web
> customers, so they can eventually check order status, RMAs, enrollment to
> events...
> They won't have access to the full system a
Hello Antony, inline answers:
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Antony Lesuisse wrote:
> huh, what are rambling about ?
>
Not "rambling", just presenting an innovative solution to what Mario was
asking for.
>
> [...]
>
> I might be wrong, but it looks, to me, that this branch will obsolete you
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
>
> 2013/11/9 Raphael Valyi
>
>> I'm curious to see all XSS and DOS exploits that will be found against
>> OpenERP powered websites in the wild. Come one, you have never been a web
>> publishing technology,
Guys [0],
just a note of optimism (hey what else would you expect?):
with the new API [1], it will be easier to write shorter lines:
self.pool.get('ruby.rocks') -> self.pool['ruby.rocks'] (already available
on v7 in fact)
some_object.some_method(cr, uid, ids, *args, **kw) ->
some_object.some_metho
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Raphael Valyi wrote:
> Guys [0],
>
> just a note of optimism (hey what else would you expect?):
> with the new API [1], it will be easier to write shorter lines:
> self.pool.get('ruby.rocks') -> self.pool['ruby.rocks
Yes we can do that for now,
but my opinion is that more and more open source is a socially distributed
activity and a single AUTHORS.txt file badly captures this reality over the
time and badly reward the mass of occasional contributors. Worse it doesn't
reward joining such an established project.
Hello Houssine,
today I mirror all branches every tow hours indeed. Adding a branch takes
me like 3 commands and 10 minutes if it's for server or web and like one
hour if it's for the addons (bzr global warming job). If you need some
additional branch to be included just tell me.
I could mirror fa
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Oscar Alca wrote:
> I don't think that there is a reason to have this discussion, PEP's were
> made by a reason indeed, and PEP8 is known by allmost all Python
> programmers, so here is the scenario, imagine that in a month from now a
> old Python programmer dives
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Rodrigue Villetard <
rodrigue.villet...@sacristi.fr> wrote:
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I am currently trying out the openerp-connector (it looks very nice by the
> way, kudos to all contributors). My willing is to sync all products to an
> elasticsearch database.
>
> I
@Guewen,
just a note to tell that a per product export is how I implemented
https://github.com/akretion/solerp/tree/master/solerp and this is exactly
where I use your queue framework.
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Rodrigue Villetard <
rodrigue.villet...@sacristi.fr> wrote:
>
> Hello Raphaël,
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Fabien Pinckaers wrote:
>
>
> On 11/29/2013 11:51 AM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
> >
> > @Fabien: I think it should be great if you share with us the specific
> > branch in this thread where the new stock is landing please, to be sure
> > everybody start with it from
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero <
pedro.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Maxime,
>
> Say in thay way, "plan to make incompatible modules" sounds very rude.
> There are now incompatibilities in 6.1, but the plan is that in
> refactorization to remove as many as we can (alway
Hello all,
I don't have a strong opinion about where file_exchange should go, but
still I have one:
I definitely vote for inclusion into OCA umbrella.
However I don't vote for merge into the server-env-tools branch.
Why?
1. same reasoning as before about putting many modules into the same
Hello Pedro,
about the minor version changes. I think it's too much hassle to maintain.
Imagine all the incremental changes you do when you propose a MP...
Or may be we can decide we maintain it only for a set of very central
critical modules.
But I would rather have this done automatically.
I thi
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> About @raphael comment.
>
> IMHO when you distribute with __openep__.py is exactly the same complex
> need than with setup.py (change 1 line in one commit), because the version
> must be loaded "Manually" or written in some fil
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Pedro Manuel Baeza Romero <
pedro.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, Raphäel,
>
> I would love also to have a decent package manager, but we still have the
> same problem with git that we had months ago: a way to make translations as
> easy as with Launchpad. Do you know
On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Nhomar Hernández wrote:
>
> 2014/1/7 Raphael Valyi
>
>> sorry, I don't understand what is wrong with the transition path I
>> described, to sum up:
>
>
@Nhomar, answers in line:
>
> My Friend,
>
> The main issue is: w
Hello Gustavo,
First kudos for the module!
As a note let me just tell you our Latex + OpenERP story:
at Akretion, during 2 years we used to produce our big OpenERP project
quotes using OpenERP inside Latex reports!
Technically, the way we did it was extending the Gollum wiki (the wiki of
Github
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Houssine BAKKALI <
houssine.bakk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with Martin.
>
> And aside of that from performance point of view as far as I know(I might
> be wrong) the CMS, E-Commerce and the ERP share the same application
> server. What happen if the charge on
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 12:51 AM, Ray Carnes wrote:
> To back this up, the first two things that became 'commonly' hosted by
> third parties on publicly accessible (though locked down via
> authentication methods) were:
>
> (In the US at least)
>
> 1) Payroll (as suggested by Fabrice - it doesn't
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Mario Arias wrote:
> That is the problem.
> Clients in general don't care about open or closed source. They just need
> to fullfill a need and that is not for free...
>
> They are paying us (all of us) for the services so it is not take without
> giving
>
> So
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Mario Arias wrote:
> Thanks Raphael,
>
> That was the expected technical answer, not guts involved dogmas...
>
> We are good at developing, not at legal stuff, that's why I am looking
> for feedback from the community...
>
> At least for us it is difficult to g
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Kurt Haselwimmer wrote:
> [...]
>
> Maybe I am missing something, but if I am it means it has not been
> sufficiently signposted, as, for example, I have spent hours on the openERP
> website trying to figure out if there is a way to attach simple courier
> tracking
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 7:13 PM, Kurt Haselwimmer wrote:
> Dear Raphael,
>
> [...]
>
> Say I create a new feature for the webstore, say even - the shipment
> tracking feature I described - whereby I can store parameter trackno,
> together with a courier choice, such that the URL
> www.courier.com/
Hello Seb,
what about backporting the QWeb v8 version of it?
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~openerp-dev/openobject-addons/trunk-qweb-report/view/head:/product/views/product_label.xml
just changing the language from qweb to mako should make the next migration
straightforward, at least it's HTML + web
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Eric Caudal wrote:
> +1,
> It is depending on the localization. In Chinese you always display Family
> name+given name
>
Sorry, if I'm telling things you all know, but this is a good introduction
on the topic by the W3C:
http://www.w3.org/International/questions/
Hello Fabien and all,
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Fabien Pinckaers wrote:
>
>> *Fabien said:* for migration, use OpenERP Entreprise !
>>
>
> Yes, here is why I am convinced it's the right way to build a sustainable
> business:
>
> 1/ partners that resell OpenERP Enterprise sees new version
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Yannick Buron wrote:
> Dear OpenERP Community,
>
> As we can see on launchpad, theses days a new saas-3 branch has been
> created by OpenERP SA, following their process described here :
> http://help.openerp.com/question/36712/what-is-the-
> difference-between-trun
Hello
thank you Fabrice for that valuable summary about bank statements in
OpenERP.
Now, I may be wrong, but I think your "Account Deposit" idea you mentioned
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nJDyQRZZFKTlvuc4Oj_0QSDXRt7XjEyjrpcwH4M3TLE/edit
may
actually be overlapping what people where already
Hello Peter,
I think many share your analysis. Basically it's a matter of C2C +
community peer reviewed quality vs something offshored no very battle
tested yet (reminder we discovered the v7 contact woes like 4 months after
v7 was released..). That being said, I think the qweb reports for the cor
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 1:47 AM, Ferdinand Gassauer wrote:
> On 2014-02-19 04:59, Antony Lesuisse wrote:
>
> Thank you for clarifying this.
>
> IMO such information should be part of OpenERP Marketing activities
> towards partners and would avoid mail threads like this one
>
> The argument
>
Hello,
I have no strong opinion on that this, but still I share mine: I would say
once we are able to ensure we can follow current Python releases (3.x),
then we can afford the luxury to look backward to try no breaking older
Python versions.
As we are unable to catch up with the Python 3.x line,
Hello Pedro,
I think the easiest is to merge official v8 into OCB in a v8 OCB serie
branched from the current v7 OCB.
Now, speaking about automation of the thing, we have to take a step back:
for several reasons, OCB and official v7 belong to different projects and
cannot easily be merged due to
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Nicolas Jeudy wrote:
>
> 2014-02-25 0:43 GMT+01:00 Raphael Valyi :
>
>> --theirs
>
>
> Can you explain --theirs ?
> I actually try to maintain saas-3 with OCB merge with gihub and it is ok I
> think. I just have many i18n confl
valyi <http://twitter.com/#!/rvalyi>
+55 21 2516 2954
www.akretion.com
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:13 AM, Stefan wrote:
> On 02/25/2014 12:43 AM, Raphael Valyi wrote:
> > Hello Pedro,
> >
> > I think the easiest is to merge official v8 into OCB in a v8 OCB serie
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Stefan Rijnhart wrote:
> On 02/25/2014 03:02 PM, Raphael Valyi wrote:
> > Hello Stefan
> >
> > Then eventually, in a pure Launchpad scenario, may be the easiest
> > would be have an automated replica of OCB v7 back into the main
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
