Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 28, 2022. It is now read-only.

[FIX] MRP BOM creation #109

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: 10.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

richard-willdooit
Copy link
Contributor

The configurator was creating a new BOM, every time
a configuration was retrieved! Routine now only
creates a BOM if there is none.

Also, refactored to allow for overriding and hooks.
This allows custom code to create a default BOM before
the attributes are added, and for more clever adding
of products (quantities, etc).

The configurator was creating a new BOM, every time
a configuration was retrieved!  Routine now only
creates a BOM if there is none.

Also, refactored to allow for overriding and hooks.
This allows custom code to create a default BOM before
the attributes are added, and for more clever adding
of products (quantities, etc).
@richard-willdooit
Copy link
Contributor Author

@PCatinean I will add some tests when you finish refactoring and I will re-propose the merge.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Jun 17, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #109 into 10.0 will increase coverage by 0.58%.
The diff coverage is 96.55%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             10.0     #109      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   61.62%   62.21%   +0.58%     
==========================================
  Files          14       14              
  Lines        1368     1392      +24     
==========================================
+ Hits          843      866      +23     
- Misses        525      526       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
product_configurator_mrp/models/product.py 94.59% <96.55%> (+2.28%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 64010f5...a62d4c9. Read the comment docs.

@matt454357
Copy link
Contributor

Any updates on this?

@elvise
Copy link

elvise commented Jan 30, 2020

Very interesting PR, any updates on this ?

@richard-willdooit
Copy link
Contributor Author

@elvise Not really - the branch is stable - I have it in 2 deployed environments, but unmerged here.

@elvise
Copy link

elvise commented Feb 2, 2020

@elvise Not really - the branch is stable - I have it in 2 deployed environments, but unmerged here.

The issue is fixed in v12 ?

Do you have merged any others good features ? 😁

@richard-willdooit
Copy link
Contributor Author

@elvise I have a lot of custom features for our main 2 clients who use this. However, both are on v10 and I have not at all looked at the 12 dev, and a long time since I was involved in 11.

@elvise
Copy link

elvise commented Feb 4, 2020

@richard-willdooit sounds good!
Your customers running in CE or EE...?

@richard-willdooit
Copy link
Contributor Author

@elvise EE, but there is nothing Enterprise dependent in the code. It is all backend (Sales Order) dependent code, as they are not using the configurator on the website, and they are not using it for Purchasing (they manufacture their configured products)

@elvise
Copy link

elvise commented Feb 8, 2020

@richard-willdooit in this PR its included also this:
#110 (comment)

If yes I’m interesting complete this PR and make also porting for V12

@matt454357
Copy link
Contributor

It appears that the v11/v12 product_configurator_mrp module is non-functional, at least in terms of generating BOMs (as described in Issue #167). Can anyone verify this?

@elvise
Copy link

elvise commented May 9, 2020

hi there, any good news for this PR ?

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants