This was a workaround for ChromeOS, but we realized it was not really good.
Disable it for the same reasons as nexedi/slapos!1196 :

 - not everybody use ChromeOS
 - this breaks the ctrl+click shortcut to go to definition/follow link
 - it makes ERP5 monaco editor behaves differently from others monaco editor
 - ChromeOS users can use chrome://flags/#use-search-click-for-right-click

When cleaning up Wendelin from restricted python pandas code
(see https://lab.nexedi.com/levin.zimmermann/wendelin/tree/remove-redundant-pandas),
it turned out that there was one line still missing in erp5.
This missing line caused a failed test in wendelin functional tests:

  https://erp5js.nexedi.net/#/test_result_module/20220614-1B46817BD/6

Readding the line fixed the test.

See merge request nexedi/erp5!1641

This happens in project related task report dialog (
testProjectRelatedTaskReport from
erp5_report_renderjs_ui_test:testFunctionalRJSReportLanguage )

jslint complain about trailing commas

using movement date rather than order date is more correct

composition API, which is used to select the "most applicable" model
(Trade Condition, Transformation, Pay Sheet Model, etc) with the same
reference was only discarding deleted and validated models, but it
was selecting draft models.

This leads to this kind of problem:
 - A validated model exist, with an effective date
 - A new model is made by cloning the validated one, edited to set
  effective date from now and validated
 - The first validated model is also cloned by mistake, but not
  validated
In such case, the model cloned by mistake might be used, which from
user point of view is wrong, because user validated a model, so if
the system use a draft instead, that's a very wrong behaviour.

This change require models to be validated for the composition API to
work, many tests were updated to validate the model (either in the test
or in the data business template used by the test).

This change might also produce different results in production, because
it was possible that some draft models were selected before, now they
will no longer be selected. To check for potential side effects, we
recommend looking for all draft models with a reference, examine them
one by one and validate the model if it's a case where user forgot to
validate.

Since
  commit f363ac65
  Author: Vincent Pelletier <vincent@nexedi.com>
  Date:   Wed Mar 23 15:55:46 2022 +0900

      Products.CMFActivity.ActivityTool: Store user object in activity.
user_name on newly created activities is always None. As a result,
activities using dummyGroupMethod are executed within the security
context which spawns the group, which is System Processes, instead of
the user which spawned each activity.
Add a unittest for this.

This was broken by:
  commit f363ac65
  Author: Vincent Pelletier <vincent@nexedi.com>
  Date:   Wed Mar 23 15:55:46 2022 +0900

      Products.CMFActivity.ActivityTool: Store user object in activity.
as user_name becomes always None.

See merge request nexedi/erp5!1637

This script stopped working since Catalog changed to be ERP5 document,
because it was calling the unindex method of the catalog (which
itself is indexable like any other ERP5 document). Update to use the
uncatalogObject which is the method to unindex a document by uid.

Even though it was somehow working before, it was not really correct
in selecting objects, because it was using - operator on TIMESTAMP
column, which is not computing a difference in seconds as this script
was expecting. See for example https://stackoverflow.com/a/24504132/7607763
or the example below for an explanation. Instead, use TIMESTAMPADD
to compute the start timestamp only once and use >= operator, which
works as expected.

This query was also sorting by indexation_timestamp, which does not
use an index. Remove the sort because it's not really needed.

Excluding reserved path was also not needed, we no longer use these
since 69aefdff (ZSQLCatalog: Drop support for "reserved" path.,
2017-09-18)

---

Another reproduction of the timestamp arithmetic problem

select
   TIMESTAMP('2021-01-02 00:00:00') - TIMESTAMP('2021-01-01 00:00:00') a,
   20210102000000 - 20210101000000 aa,
   TIMESTAMP('2021-06-01 00:00:00') - TIMESTAMP('2021-05-31 00:00:00') b,
   20210601000000 - 20210531000000 bb,
   TIMESTAMPDIFF(second, TIMESTAMP('2021-05-31 00:00:00'), TIMESTAMP('2021-06-01 00:00:00')) c

| a | aa | b | bb | c |
| ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ |
| 1000000 | 1000000 | 70000000 | 70000000 | 86400 |

This is a bit easier to read

When a test fail, we make a data-url link with the HTML of the current
page, so that we can easily investigate test failures n test nodes.
We should not let errors that might happen here propagate, otherwise
the test result is not created and the test runner does not detect
that the test is finished.

One case that caused such errors was failed assertion just after
using goBack command without waiting

Depending on field type, if min and max are not setup then they can be equals to the empty string or undefined.

PaySheet_getODTStyleSheet => PaySheetTransaction_getODTStyleSheet
PaySheet_printAsODT => PaySheetTransaction_printAsODT
PaySheet_viewODTPrintDialog => PaySheetTransaction_viewODTPrintDialog
PaySheetModeLine_init => PaySheetModelLine_init
RatioSettings_view => PaySheetModelRatioLine_view

Some proxy fields had inconsistent internal data structures, maybe
rendering incorrectly in ods/odt styles

This was broken by:
  commit f363ac65
  Author: Vincent Pelletier <vincent@nexedi.com>
  Date:   Wed Mar 23 15:55:46 2022 +0900

      Products.CMFActivity.ActivityTool: Store user object in activity.
as user_name becomes always None.

Business templates are installed by system user, which is a special
user not returned by getWrappedOwner. Because of this, the "fixing
problems or activating a disabled alarm is not allowed" error was
raised when checking if the owner of the alarm has manage portal
permission on the alarm.

This switches the implementation to explicit creation of the user
when user id is the system user, so that we have a user with the
permission to solve the alarm.

is* selenium commands do not fail when evaluating to false, I guess
we wanted to use assert* here.

This transition should not be more restrictive that the original
method ie. 'Modify portal content' for "real" documents and public
for temp objects.

When start and end are setup on float/integer field, the max and mic attributes are also setup in the input html element.
So if the user enter a number outside this range, the browser should display an error.

using start and end filed on float, trigger web-browser error. But UI test are looking for multiple fields check by erp5.
2 validators script are added because no argument can be passed to external validator, so :
TALES: python: context.Base_ValidateFloatRange(value, mix=1, max=2)
doesn't work

On Zope2, python scripts do not have __code__, they only have
func_code (and same for __defauls__/func_defaults).
We tried to backport the support of __code__ from Zope4 as a Zope2
patch - it was SlapOS patch 4fa33dfc6 (erp5: py3: `func_{code,defaults}`
was replaced in Python3 by `__{code,defaults}__`., 2022-04-25),
but this patch was incomplete. We tried to backport more, but then
realized that we don't need to use __code__ on ERP5 master yet,
because ERP5 master branch is still supporting Zope2 only.

This patch revert a small part of a17bb910 (py2/py3: Make Products
code compatible with both python2 and python3., 2022-04-13), the part
where we use f.__code__ where f might be a python script. For now,
we'll apply this patch only on the Zope4 branch.

A few places where f.func_code was used and f was a for sure not a
python script but a simple class method or function are kept here, as
__code__ support is missing only on in ZODB scripts.

This is not really a test, but it reuses runUnitTest/runTestSuite
commands, because they are good tools to quickly create ERP5
environment and installing business templates.

To re-build and re-export all* business templates, use this command:

    ./bin/runTestSuite --test_suite=ReExportERP5BusinessTemplateTestSuite

--node_quantity argument can also be used to process multiple
business templates in parallel.

* note that this does not actually handle all business templates, but
only the ones for which coding style test is enabled, because most
business templates for which it is not enabled can not be installed.

This typically produces large diffs that should apply the same
change to many files and ideally, nothing else. We also developed a
simple tool which summarize the diff by detecting the same chunk
present in multiple files, it can be found at
https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5/snippets/1171 and also below.

---

from __future__ import print_function
"""report similar hunks in a patch.
"""
__version__ = '0.1'

import argparse
import collections
import codecs
import unidiff # unidiff==0.7.3
import hashlib

parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument('patch_file', type=argparse.FileType('r'), default='-', nargs='?')
parser.add_argument('-v', '--verbose', action='count', default=0)
args = parser.parse_args()

patchset = unidiff.PatchSet(codecs.getreader('utf-8')(args.patch_file))

chunks_by_filenames = collections.defaultdict(set)

for patch in patchset:
  for chunk in patch:
    chunk_text = u''.join([unicode(l) for l in chunk])
    chunks_by_filenames[chunk_text].add(patch.path)

for chunk_text, filenames in chunks_by_filenames.items():
  chunk_hash = hashlib.md5(chunk_text.encode('utf-8')).hexdigest()
  print("Chunk %s is present in %s files" % (chunk_hash, len(filenames)))
  if args.verbose:
    print()
    print("\n".join("  " + f for f in sorted(filenames)))
    print()
  if args.verbose > 1:
    print()
    print(chunk_text)
    print()

To prevent rounding errors, we always compare rounded values to the
precision of the accounting currency. There was a place here where we
were using -= without rounding, which caused to detect a difference
between new and current stock and insert a line for 0 in an existing
instance for which some accounting lines were created with too precise
values - but not in a way that was detected by the assertions in
AccountingPeriod_createBalanceTransaction.

Rounding here as well solved the problem with that data.