Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[16.0][MIG][l10n_br_nfe] #3092

Merged
merged 1,168 commits into from
Jul 24, 2024
Merged

[16.0][MIG][l10n_br_nfe] #3092

merged 1,168 commits into from
Jul 24, 2024

Conversation

rvalyi
Copy link
Member

@rvalyi rvalyi commented May 23, 2024 •
edited
Loading

standard migration

based on v15 migration #2874

IMPORTANT: ainda tem alguns hacks temporarios:

@rvalyi rvalyi marked this pull request as draft May 23, 2024 12:13
@rvalyi rvalyi force-pushed the 16.0-mig-l10n_br_nfe branch 2 times, most recently from f27ab60 to 2d1e9fe Compare May 23, 2024 14:48
@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented May 23, 2024

/ocabot migration l10n_br_nfe

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot added this to the 16.0 milestone May 23, 2024
@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot mentioned this pull request May 23, 2024
Open
58 tasks
@rvalyi rvalyi force-pushed the 16.0-mig-l10n_br_nfe branch 3 times, most recently from 4de1432 to fe5404d Compare May 23, 2024 15:06
@rvalyi rvalyi force-pushed the 16.0-mig-l10n_br_nfe branch 3 times, most recently from 425d06b to f04a6bf Compare June 12, 2024 23:15
@rvalyi rvalyi mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2024
Merged
@rvalyi rvalyi force-pushed the 16.0-mig-l10n_br_nfe branch 8 times, most recently from 51266d6 to a328cc4 Compare June 20, 2024 16:46
@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented Jun 20, 2024

Pessoal, ta agora no mesmo ponto do que na v15, ou seja, o unico hack eh de introduzir uma dependencia do l10n_br_nfe_spec pro modulo spec_driven_model. Eh um hack pequeno que eu diria que a gente poderia ate deixar para resolver depois. O restante eu acho que eu migrei certinho aqui.

@mileo mileo added the migration label Jul 6, 2024
@rvalyi rvalyi force-pushed the 16.0-mig-l10n_br_nfe branch 4 times, most recently from 67d0aa0 to 55c8a2b Compare July 24, 2024 00:46
@rvalyi rvalyi force-pushed the 16.0-mig-l10n_br_nfe branch 3 times, most recently from c20279d to ff8045d Compare July 24, 2024 01:15
@rvalyi rvalyi marked this pull request as ready for review July 24, 2024 01:24
@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented Jul 24, 2024

@renatonlima @marcelsavegnago @antoniospneto @mileo ficou pronto para revisar tb. Mesma coisa do que a migracao da v15, apenas um commit a mais.

@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented Jul 24, 2024

hum tem a mesma treta do que em #2874 (comment)

@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented Jul 24, 2024

o problema foi resolvido com 8bbf07a

antoniospneto
antoniospneto approved these changes Jul 24, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@antoniospneto antoniospneto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Só uma observação,a verificação no CI pro status de desenvolvimento é pra ficar desabilitado mesmo?

@rvalyi
[MIG] l10n_br_nfe: Migration to 15.0
d65bddd 
hint: in NFe35200159594315000157550010000000012062777161.xml the E-COM11
product got a price change in v15; also replaced spaces by tabs.

[TMP] attempt to fix v15 issue
@rvalyi
[CI] fix GH test.yml after l10n_br_nfe v15 MIG
c43e86d
@rvalyi
[IMP] l10n_br_nfe: pre-commit stuff
d1fa5ce
@rvalyi
[MIG] l10n_br_nfe: Migration to 16.0
afb6e34
@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented Jul 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Só uma observação,a verificação no CI pro status de desenvolvimento é pra ficar desabilitado mesmo?

Realmente eu me embananei ontem nos ultimos rebases da migraçao v15 (o impacto nao eh muito grande tb). Eu corrigi isso num commit separado c43e86d que eu vou jogar para a branch 15.0 tb. EDIT aqui

Preferi fazer isso num commit separarado para deixar o commit da migracao v15 igual da branch 15.0 (sem dar amend nele). Alias recentemente eu usei o OCA/oca-port e alem de ter que limitar a busca dos commits para 6 meses atras, eu fiquei na duvida de como ele identificava os commits que ja tinham sido portado. Talvez que quando o cherry-pick deu uma leve alteracao automatica ou que vc resolve algum conflito ele considera que o commit nao eh igual no oca-port e isso acab criando um montao de false positive para suggerir para port. Talvez tou errado, mas enfim por isso que preferi separar o commit com o fix.

@rvalyi rvalyi mentioned this pull request Jul 24, 2024
Merged
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

@rvalyi
Copy link
Member Author

rvalyi commented Jul 24, 2024

/ocabot merge nobump

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 16.0-ocabot-merge-pr-3092-by-rvalyi-bump-nobump, awaiting test results.

@OCA-git-bot OCA-git-bot merged commit f808283 into OCA:16.0 Jul 24, 2024
7 checks passed
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Congratulations, your PR was merged at c00737a. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@antoniospneto antoniospneto antoniospneto approved these changes

@marcelsavegnago marcelsavegnago marcelsavegnago approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
approved merged 🎉 migration ready to merge
Projects
None yet
Milestone
16.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.