- 03 Oct, 2019 13 commits
-
-
Klaus Wölfel authored
-
Klaus Wölfel authored
-
Klaus Wölfel authored
-
Klaus Wölfel authored
-
Klaus Wölfel authored
-
Klaus Wölfel authored
-
Rafael Monnerat authored
(cherry picked from commit eed6ff24799a73a63327152a662669ba3ecfc391)
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Rafael Monnerat authored
Added aggregate item and item creations actions on new portal types. (cherry picked from commit a32a565f2e4921c087803aa526bca8c853e18887) Conflicts: bt5/erp5_item/bt/revision
-
Rafael Monnerat authored
Introduce temp_object parameter on builder.build() and propagate it over until the newContent() calls. This change allow use create Temporary Documents intestead real ones, like a "preview". (cherry picked from commit 959776ce50c2e7ee2b8f9945ec91a2e0fbe08619) Conflicts: product/ERP5/Document/SimulatedDeliveryBuilder.py
-
Jérome Perrin authored
This module is not sorted, we cannot just do assertions based on line index. Instead we do two different approaches: - When there is only one "empty" draft transaction, we check locate the line based on the state cell and then check each cell relatively to that first xpath - After we had a second draft, we just check that we have two lines matching each cell predicate.
-
Jérome Perrin authored
Sometimes test fail we don't have any information about what the problem was. Using the same technique of turning a promise into "a function called several times until it returns true or false", we can get rejection failures in the selenium error message.
-
Jérome Perrin authored
The term (used for example on HTTPExchange_view/my_follow_up_title ) is "Follow-up". This will fix testNamingConventions failure.
-
- 02 Oct, 2019 27 commits
-
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
so that user can overwrite easier in html
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
-
Xiaowu Zhang authored
For options: ${WebPage_insertFollowUpCostEffortReport} ${WebPage_insertFollowUpCostEffortDetailReport} script's name is changed to Base_generateCostEffortReportContent and parameter is changed also
-
Ivan Tyagov authored
template for Scalability tests.
-
Georgios Dagkakis authored
It was found useful in cases, so good to have it available
-
Sebastien Robin authored
Exactly like prices and other properties, it is useful for some projects to define different descriptions depending if we are doing sales or purchases
-
Romain Courteaud authored
[erp5_core] Return 400 status code when updating a dialog
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
Also, this prevents logging the same information on every listbox load.
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
This merge request aims to prevent programming errors by raising instead of silently doing nothing (which is a source of bugs). Currently, if an object as category property for a category "category", 2 families of setters were created : 1. The string setter, following the format ```_setCategory``` and taking a relative URL as the argument. 2. The value setter, following the format ```_setCategoryValue``` and taking an object as the argument. The issue is that developers may pass the wrong argument to one of these functions, having for consequences : 1. For case (1), if an object is passed, the code would silently do nothing : nothing is set as relation, but the code doesn't fail. This is the worst case. 2. For the second case, passing a relative URL to ```_setCategoryValue``` would "work" (in the meaning the relation is set to the correct object). This may sound like a feature, but in my opinion it is confusing given the way ERP5 developers apprehend these setters nowadays. For case 1, a test is existing that an exception is raised, but due to coding error the feature disappeared and no one noticed : https://lab.nexedi.com/Nicolas/erp5/blob/b3ed2210ed6b30390b901c8620de6eafcc27a574/product/CMFCategory/tests/testCMFCategory.py#L810-815 For case 2, compatibility code exists in the underlying function ```_setValue``` : https://lab.nexedi.com/Nicolas/erp5/blob/b3ed2210ed6b30390b901c8620de6eafcc27a574/product/ERP5Type/Base.py#L1840-1842 In this MR, the exception caused by case (1) has been restored (so now it fails loudly). Case (2) has been deprecated, in order to keep backward compatibility. I have run the tests with the ```DeprecationWarning``` raising an error instead of just a warning, and fixed the code were the setters weren't used correctly. Ideally, tests should always run with this ```DeprecationWarning``` being a real error so both cases crash loudly. This won't be part of this Merge Request. /reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!938
-
Jérome Perrin authored
This adds a new field on Test Suite Repository to configure a "gitlab connector". If this is set, then the commit from this repository will be annotated with the test status (failed or success). Gitlab uses these annotations to show that status on the merge request. At the same time, fix a few minor problems on `erp5_test_result`. /reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!924
-