Issue 5881

Title
Statement line party should be required if account has requires party
Priority
feature
Status
resolved
Nosy list
ced, pokoli, reviewbot, roundup-bot
Assigned to
pokoli
Keywords
review

Created on 2016-09-14.13:12:45 by pokoli, last changed 2 months ago by roundup-bot.

Messages

New changeset e97f1ae4477c by Sergi Almacellas Abellana in branch 'default':
Require party on statement line if account requires one
https://hg.tryton.org/tryton-env/rev/e97f1ae4477c
New changeset 92522a1c18a2 by Sergi Almacellas Abellana in branch 'default':
Require party on statement line if account requires one
https://hg.tryton.org/modules/account_statement/rev/92522a1c18a2
Author: [hidden] (ced) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2022-07-15.14:02:43

Indeed since issue5882 I think we can make the party required when account which require one is set. User who wants to create partially valid statement should use origin.

Author: [hidden] (pokoli) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2016-09-23.14:55:20
I reopen it as in issue5581 won't change the user messages. So I think we should include a more explanatory before creating the moves to indicate which line is missing the party field.
Author: [hidden] (pokoli) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2016-09-21.17:16:41
El 14/09/16 a les 14:30, Cédric Krier ha escrit:
> On 2016-09-14 13:51, Sergi Almacellas Abellana wrote:
>> > El 14/09/16 a les 13:33, Cédric Krier ha escrit:
>>> > > I do not think it is a good change. As statement can be filled and complete in many steps, it is better to have the minimum constraint.
>> > Understood, but maybe we should show some hint to the user to indicate 
>> > that the account requires a party.
>> > 
>> > This make easier for the user to find the wrong lines in case the 
>> > statment has a lot of lines.
> So a better error message is needed.
> 

This is the same as issue5581, because the required error message is generic for all records. 

So I'm marking this issue as duplicate and we try to fix the other issue.
Author: [hidden] (ced) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2016-09-14.14:30:06
On 2016-09-14 13:51, Sergi Almacellas Abellana wrote:
> El 14/09/16 a les 13:33, Cédric Krier ha escrit:
> > I do not think it is a good change. As statement can be filled and complete in many steps, it is better to have the minimum constraint.
> Understood, but maybe we should show some hint to the user to indicate 
> that the account requires a party.
> 
> This make easier for the user to find the wrong lines in case the 
> statment has a lot of lines.

So a better error message is needed.

> So we could add the party required field on views and allow to search on 
> them.

You can not search on a one2many.
Author: [hidden] (pokoli) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2016-09-14.13:51:11
El 14/09/16 a les 13:33, Cédric Krier ha escrit:
> I do not think it is a good change. As statement can be filled and complete in many steps, it is better to have the minimum constraint.
Understood, but maybe we should show some hint to the user to indicate 
that the account requires a party.

This make easier for the user to find the wrong lines in case the 
statment has a lot of lines.

So we could add the party required field on views and allow to search on 
them.
Author: [hidden] (ced) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2016-09-14.13:33:34
I do not think it is a good change. As statement can be filled and complete in many steps, it is better to have the minimum constraint.
Author: [hidden] (pokoli) Tryton committer Tryton translator
Date: 2016-09-14.13:12:45
It's possible to leave empty the party field of a statement line with an account that requires the party field to be informed. This causes a required error when posting the statement as the party field of the move line is empty. 

We should make the party required if the account requires a party to force the user to enter the value before posting the statement.
History
Date User Action Args
2022-08-02 09:38:31roundup-botsetmessages: + msg77543
2022-08-02 09:38:29roundup-botsetmessages: + msg77542
nosy: + roundup-bot
status: testing -> resolved
2022-07-19 13:54:34reviewbotsetmessages: + msg77432
2022-07-15 14:53:18reviewbotsetmessages: + msg77336
2022-07-15 14:04:55cedunlinkissue5581 superseder
2022-07-15 14:02:43cedsetmessages: + msg77333
status: chatting -> testing
2016-09-23 14:55:20pokolisetstatus: invalid -> chatting
messages: + msg28961
2016-09-21 17:19:50pokolilinkissue5581 superseder
2016-09-21 17:16:41pokolisetstatus: testing -> invalid
messages: + msg28903
2016-09-14 14:30:06cedsetmessages: + msg28749

Showing 10 items. Show all history (warning: this could be VERY long)