We should check if this should go to generic erp5

The Movement history only showed movements for owner Wölfel/WBI. We changed the dialog to additionally group the inventory by owner. Email [Woelfel-dev] Movement history of Product incomplete from Leopold Buschmann-Gräf on 2023-06-19

WOELFEL: erp5_property_sheets: add source_section*/destination_section* acquired properties to DefaultSupply

it can happen that getEffectiveModel does not find a model, this
is currently causing activity failures in indexation of
transformations. Tolerate errors here because this is not an error
but just a sign of invalid user data.

User is usually interested by last movement in stock, not by several
months/years old movement. Thus display first fresh movement, and user
could then go to next pages to see oldest movements if needed.

Quantity Split Move solver allows user to select to which delivery quantities should be moved when
splitting. If the user did not have access to one of these deliveries the dialog would fail. Therfore we
only search for those deliveries which can be accessed by the user.

The code was assuming that we could have only one quantity divergency per
delivery. So improve to support multiple divergencies.

`python` command doesn't exist anymore in most recent distribution and
our PASS (theia), but python3 has been available for years now.

erp5_crm: add category business_application/crm form module view

erp5_project: add category business_application/project for module view

erp5_pdm: add category business_application/pdm for module view

The missing workflow resulted in a bug when moving quantities multiple times, first to one delivery, then to another delivery. Then the same solver process with same decision was used as for the first time even if the first delivery was already delivered or movement was deleted. The reason was that Quantity Split Move Solver did not change to succeeded state after solving, so Solver Process did not change to solved state.

There is cases of projects running without price currency defined for every
possible third party used in accounting. Thus tolerate that price currency might
not be defined.

We add getFutureStateSet on DCWorkflow, also add this function
to ERP5 Workflows

When cleaning up Wendelin from restricted python pandas code
(see https://lab.nexedi.com/levin.zimmermann/wendelin/tree/remove-redundant-pandas),
it turned out that there was one line still missing in erp5.
This missing line caused a failed test in wendelin functional tests:

  https://erp5js.nexedi.net/#/test_result_module/20220614-1B46817BD/6

Readding the line fixed the test.

See merge request nexedi/erp5!1641

This happens in project related task report dialog (
testProjectRelatedTaskReport from
erp5_report_renderjs_ui_test:testFunctionalRJSReportLanguage )

jslint complain about trailing commas

using movement date rather than order date is more correct

composition API, which is used to select the "most applicable" model
(Trade Condition, Transformation, Pay Sheet Model, etc) with the same
reference was only discarding deleted and validated models, but it
was selecting draft models.

This leads to this kind of problem:
 - A validated model exist, with an effective date
 - A new model is made by cloning the validated one, edited to set
  effective date from now and validated
 - The first validated model is also cloned by mistake, but not
  validated
In such case, the model cloned by mistake might be used, which from
user point of view is wrong, because user validated a model, so if
the system use a draft instead, that's a very wrong behaviour.

This change require models to be validated for the composition API to
work, many tests were updated to validate the model (either in the test
or in the data business template used by the test).

This change might also produce different results in production, because
it was possible that some draft models were selected before, now they
will no longer be selected. To check for potential side effects, we
recommend looking for all draft models with a reference, examine them
one by one and validate the model if it's a case where user forgot to
validate.

Since
  commit f363ac65
  Author: Vincent Pelletier <vincent@nexedi.com>
  Date:   Wed Mar 23 15:55:46 2022 +0900

      Products.CMFActivity.ActivityTool: Store user object in activity.
user_name on newly created activities is always None. As a result,
activities using dummyGroupMethod are executed within the security
context which spawns the group, which is System Processes, instead of
the user which spawned each activity.
Add a unittest for this.

This was broken by:
  commit f363ac65
  Author: Vincent Pelletier <vincent@nexedi.com>
  Date:   Wed Mar 23 15:55:46 2022 +0900

      Products.CMFActivity.ActivityTool: Store user object in activity.
as user_name becomes always None.