Openbravo Issue Tracking System - Openbravo ERP
View Issue Details
IDProjectCategoryView StatusDate SubmittedLast Update
0007018Openbravo ERPA. Platformpublic2009-01-20 10:242009-03-06 12:34
Reportermtaal 
Assigned Tomtaal 
PrioritynormalSeveritymajorReproducibilityhave not tried
StatusclosedResolutionfixed 
PlatformOS5OS Version
Product Versionpi 
Target VersionpiFixed in Version 
Merge Request Status
Review Assigned To
OBNetwork customerNo
Web browser
ModulesCore
Support ticket
Regression level
Regression date
Regression introduced in release
Regression introduced by commit
Triggers an Emergency PackNo
Summary0007018: Online validation checks when defining/maintaining modules
DescriptionSummary of the requirements:

Online checks:
Checks which are done in the system when maintaining a module.

1.- there is a column ad_module.istranslationrequired
this boolean defines if the module requires a translation to run in other languages
if the module has some ui element (ad_window, ad_tab, ad_field, ad_element, ad_textinterface, ad_message,...) then this boolean should be set to true

2.- ad_package.javaPackage should be prefixed by ad_module.javaPackage

3.- ad_module.version, ad_module_dependency.startversion and ad_module_dependency.endversion should follow openbravo version number pattern
it should be x.y.z, where x, y and z are numbers separated by dots

4.- Dependencies should be defined with version numbers that are in the system
it should be a callout in the dependency/include tab of a module
when the user chooses a module that his module depends on, the system should fill the startversion column with the version of that module that is loaded in the system
eg: I am developing module A, and I want to define that it depends on core
I go to the dependency tab and choose core in module drop-down list
the callout should fill the startversion field with the version of core that is loaded in my system
Steps To Reproduce
Proposed Solution
Additional Information
TagsModularity
Relationships
related to defect 0007132pi closed alostale AD/DB clean up 
Attached Files
Issue History
Date ModifiedUsernameFieldChange
2009-01-20 10:24mtaalNew Issue
2009-01-20 10:24mtaalAssigned To => mtaal
2009-01-20 10:24mtaalsf_bug_id0 => 2523091
2009-01-20 10:24mtaalOBNetwork customer => No
2009-01-20 10:24mtaalRegression testing => No
2009-01-20 10:42rafarodaTag Attached: Modularity
2009-01-20 14:53mtaalNote Added: 0012393
2009-01-21 06:22pjuvaraNote Added: 0012421
2009-01-21 06:22pjuvaraStatusnew => feedback
2009-01-21 07:26mtaalNote Added: 0012423
2009-01-21 10:14iciordiaNote Added: 0012427
2009-01-21 10:15iciordiaStatusfeedback => scheduled
2009-01-21 10:15iciordiafix_in_branch => trunk
2009-01-24 22:54svnbotCheckin
2009-01-24 22:54svnbotNote Added: 0012596
2009-01-24 22:54svnbotStatusscheduled => resolved
2009-01-24 22:54svnbotResolutionopen => fixed
2009-01-24 22:54svnbotsvn_revision => 12231
2009-01-26 13:11alostaleRelationship addedrelated to 0007132
2009-03-06 12:34psarobeStatusresolved => closed

Notes
(0012393)
mtaal   
2009-01-20 14:53   
Additional validations to do, related to ad_model_objects and ad_model_object_mapping:

1.- all entries but the ones linked to windows (so ad_tab_id is not null) should be prefixed by module.javaPackage
2.- so any entry in ad_model_object with ad_tab_id not null is automatically generated, should not be editable from openbravo ui and follows a different rule
3.- default values for this elements should be generated following this rule: so whenever you create a new process, callout, etc. the system creates a new entry in ad_model_object, but without following this naming rule (prefixed by module javaPackage)
(0012421)
pjuvara   
2009-01-21 06:22   
This does not seem to be a defect but a feature request. Does it need to be implemented now or can it wait for the next release?
(0012423)
mtaal   
2009-01-21 07:26   
Hi Paolo,
This topic was entered by Ismael on the product backlog of the scrum team and was listed as important for this sprint (by Ismael). I have been assigned to implement this functionality. Therefore I entered an issue for this to document the progress and the commit of the source code to svn.

I have no strong opinion on the validity of this functionality for the phase of the project in which we are. Can you discuss with Ismael if this is indeed functionality which needs to be done now?

gr. Martin
(0012427)
iciordia   
2009-01-21 10:14   
Martin,

I've just talked to Paolo and clarified it. All these validations are needed to avoid the effort to support badly built modules. The more validations we implement at this stage the less support effort we will do in the future.

So go ahead with this as described.

Ismael
(0012596)
svnbot   
2009-01-24 22:54   
Repository: openbravo
Revision: 12231
Author: mtaal
Date: 2009-01-24 22:54:31 +0100 (Sat, 24 Jan 2009)

Fixes issue 7018, added online validation of several module fields, added callout to set first version field, added stored procedures to implement tests.

---
U trunk/src/org/openbravo/erpCommon/ad_callouts/SL_Module_Minor_Version.java
U trunk/src/org/openbravo/service/db/DalBaseProcess.java
A trunk/src-db/database/model/triggers/AD_MODULE_TRANSLATION_TRG.xml
A trunk/src-db/database/model/triggers/AD_MODULE_VERSION_TRG.xml
A trunk/src-db/database/model/triggers/AD_PACKAGE_JP_TRG.xml
U trunk/src-db/database/sourcedata/AD_CALLOUT.xml
U trunk/src-db/database/sourcedata/AD_MESSAGE.xml
U trunk/src-db/database/sourcedata/AD_MODEL_OBJECT.xml
U trunk/src-db/database/sourcedata/AD_MODEL_OBJECT_MAPPING.xml
U trunk/src-db/database/sourcedata/AD_MODULE.xml
---

https://dev.openbravo.com/websvn/openbravo/?rev=12231&sc=1 [^]