In internal transactions, we can have a payment line where source is using a bank account and destination is using another bank account.

Bank Reconciliation did not support these lines properly, because it simply assumed that *"if there's a bank reconciliation on this line, it means the line is reconciled"*, but this was incorrect, because source and destination needs to be able to reconcile this line independently.

The fixes is to change the rule from *"if there's a bank reconciliation on this line, it means the line is reconciled"* to *"if there's a bank reconciliation with the same bank account as this line's source payment, it means the line is reconciled for source"* and *"if there's a bank reconciliation with the same bank account as this line's destination payment, it means the line is reconciled for destination"*.

The related  key used to select the already reconciled lines or lines to reconcile becomes a bit more complex, it joins with category table to ensure the bank reconciliation's bank account  (which is `source_payment` on the bank reconciliation) is the same as the `section_uid` of the line in stock table that we are considering. This also has a side effect that this related key only work with queries on stock table, but it was never intended to be used elsewhere.

Another problem is that queries made by bank reconciliation module become a bit more slower. For sites where this is a problem, the recommended approach is to replace the related keys by columns on stock table. In cfec8d2b (which is part of this MR) we add indexation methods. In 5afb002090cd965bd17ffcf5c4c54ba73dfcbfc4 (which is not part of this MR and not planned for inclusion in "default" ERP5) we show an example of how to enable these methods to actually add the columns in stock table.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!495

The fact that ERP5 does not remember the selected language has been reported as a bug to us.

Instead of using a session cookie, this change make the cookie persists. For one year. This is a bit arbitrary, I copied that behavior from the "remember my username" [cookie](https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5/blob/557c20bdf0e/product/ERP5Type/patches/CookieCrumbler.py#L138) that we use to have on the login page.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!506

We realized that the references of notification messages used in credential request management had a typo (`crendential` vs `credential`) and that the message used for a new credential request was not using the same `credential_request` prefix as others.

This MR changes the messages as follow:

| Wrong Reference | Correct Reference |
| --- | --- |
| erp5-subscription.notification | credential_request-subscription |
| crendential_request-confirmation-without-password | credential_request-confirmation-without-password |
| crendential_request-confirmation-with-password | credential_request-confirmation-with-password |
| crendential_request-confirmation-without-password | credential_request-confirmation-without-password |
| crendential_recovery-reset-link | credential_recover-reset-link |
| crendential_recovery-username | credential_recovery-username |

This is an incompatible change that can affect projects that have defined some custom notification messages without explicitly setting the references on the system preferences (ie. getting the default value from the property definition).
I found one project using custom notification messages, but preference was defined.
Other projects I checked did not override these notification messages.

In our projects, we mostly use messages for credential requests, but the reference for the notification message is usually defined as a property of the web section.

So I'm confident this should not affect projects and we can proceed with this clean up without causing too much troubles. To check if you need to adjust notification messages, check if you have customized notification message with reference *Wrong Reference*.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!492

- ERP5Site_getScalabilityTestMetric script gets metrics of last created objects
- Bootstrap script now creates the users for test

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!513

This contains changes for 2 points:
1. To improve view of ERP5 Catalog and its sub-objects .
2. Export Catalog Methods with no duplication between attributes and properties after migration.

These changes are pointed out  in comment here: nexedi/erp5!178 (comment 52224)

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!510

BusinessTemplate: Look for string type in property map while extracting Properties for CatalogTemplateMethodItem

After migration of ERP5 Catalog and sub-objects, the filter attributes are
now properties of Catalog Method(s). So, they are now already exported in
xml file for the method. Thus, no need to duplicate export in _catalog_keys file.

Also, installation should take care of the changes.

Also, add tests for them

[erp5_core]: No need to have export_properties action for ERP5 Catalog as we do cleanup of old manage_exportProperties function

According to guidelines, documents should have 'edit_workflow'.
https://www.erp5.com/documentation/developer/guideline/programming/erp5-Guideline.Programming.Naming.Conventions#never-forget-edit-workflow-on-documents

This follows the guidelines and also make it feasible to go to listbox
to search or make changes in sub-object list.

Also,
- Add 'More columns' in listbox for viewing Catalog Method list.
- Add title field in listbox view for Catalog content and Catalog Filter List
- Fixup links on these views which were not consistent.

- ERP5Site_getScalabilityTestMetric script gets metrics of last created objects
- Bootstrap script now creates the users for test

When accessing an ERP5 Site, we might have automatic migration of
tools. When this happens, we might not have yet access to scripts
like ERP5Type_asSecurityGroupId.

There was already try/except, so just move slightly more code
inside.

forgot to commit related template_document_id_list

/#/bug_module/20171103-82F24A

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!489

As pointed by /Jerome, it is only used for ZMI classes
nexedi/erp5@557c20bd (comment 52113)

This was not following the signature of the real method

Catalog Tool has been added as a portal_action, so update in tests
was needed:
nexedi/erp5@ba2b3566

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!505