Question about stock_move_location_dest_constraint_base and why it depends on a module not merged

[BT-rmartin]

Dear community,

I recently realized about stock_move_location_dest_constraint_base depends on a module not yet merged in stock-logistics-warehouse.

This is fixed by this dependency, but I would like to better understand that. That will download that branch that contains that module, but also all the others from stock-logistics-warehouse to the folder dependencies in Travis. How is then deciding if it should apply the version of those addons or the one from main stock-logistics-warehouse? I guess it's related to the order of the addons path.

Wouldn't be better not to depend on something that is not yet merged?

Thanks for your clarifications in advance

@grindtildeath @dreispt @LoisRForgeFlow

[grindtildeath]

Hello @BT-rmartin ,

It is indeed better not to depend on an unmerged PR, as the dependent PR should have been merged before #696 was merged.

The unmerged dependent PR is #707 which backports the new v13.0 implementation of putaways in v12.0.
However, both these modules are tagged with maturity level Alpha, and we will not maintain stock_move_location_dest_constraint_base as we used another implementation in v13.0...

Therefore we can either:

• Merge [WMS][12.0] Add stock_putaway_rule - alpha version #707 as alpha, now that I rebased and removed the dependency on my fork
• Revert the merge of [WMS][12.0] Add stock_move_location_dest_constraint_base - alpha version #696

From my POV, it would even make more sense to do both and have #707 merged and revert the merge #696

cc @jgrandguillaume @rousseldenis

[rousseldenis]

@grindtildeath @jgrandguillaume

Be careful when you want to merge Alpha modules. The dependencies must be merged before. Although it could lead to inconsistencies.

Indeed, reverting #696 makes sense. As I understand you develop now in v13. So, the logic would tend to backport those modules.

[BT-rmartin]

Hi,

Thanks for replying. Then if you agree #696 can be reverted, you can go for it, In my opinion #707 can be merged as well as at least it doesn't add strange dependencies. But I'm nobody here to make those decisions. Could you @grindtildeath @jgrandguillaume @rousseldenis please get in touch with whoever can decide on that and proceed asap?

Thanks in advance

[grindtildeath]

I just opened revert PR #973 and I guess we can fast track it so it will close this issue.

#707 still needs reviews before being merged anyway.

[BT-rmartin]

Closing the issue as the revert PR #973 was merged. Thanks for your support guys