getTextContent maybe overloaded by subclasses, for example in
TextDocument it checks that users can access document in raw format.

backport nexedi/erp5!295

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/7

backport nexedi/erp5!504

because it happens way too often when I change ID that it's not saved and just display "Sorry, you cannot change ID" and ignore my changes

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/10

backport nexedi/erp5!495

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/9

They should be caught earlier by field validator.
If an ActivityPendingError occurs, we don't want to "half-edit" the document.

for editable id fields

This field is required, because ID are really required in Zope so we have to make an exception to prevent a Site Error message and has an external validator checking that the document has no pending activities.

This is a translated message, but it was not translated in public bt

These scripts are not used by default, because it's not convenient to
extend stock table, but sites with large amount of payment transactions
are advised to customize stock table (by patching `z_create_stock` and
`z_catalog_stock_list` to add:

 * `stock.aggregate_bank_reconciliation_date`, indexing
  `Movement_getSourceAggregateBankReconciliationDate` for source side
  and `Movement_getDestinationAggregateBankReconciliationDate` for
  destination side.
* `stock.aggregate_bank_reconciliation_uid`, indexing
  `Movement_getSourceAggregateBankReconciliationUid` for source side
  and `Movement_getDestinationAggregateBankReconciliationUid` for
  destination side.
* configure `aggregate_bank_reconciliation_date` and
  `stock.aggregate_bank_reconciliation_date` as datetime keys.

These two columns `aggregate_bank_reconciliation_date` and
`aggregate_bank_reconciliation_uid` should have priority over related keys
of the same name (It may be needed to remove the related keys as part of
the customisation)

To handle the case where an internal transaction line can be reconcilied
independently on source payment and destination payment.

It did not support reconciled internal transactions

Especially the case where same transactions is reconciled for the source
and destination.

nexedi/erp5!297

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/8

backport nexedi/erp5!492

for Q7 of https://www.erp5.com/project_section/capago-project/forum/Notification-Specifications-Email--SMS-k2z1hvaRf6



/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/5

backport nexedi/erp5!506

https://www.erp5.com/project_section/capago-project/forum/Widget-preference-not-recorded-qIzYcKy7dK/view?list_start=2&reset=1#2013576401

> We can probably change this to make changing language this way more permanent. I'll discuss this with others in Nexedi.



/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/6

getObject is not public API. Bonus is we can do one query for all uids

Since it's allowed for multiple sections from same group to post
transactions on the bank account from the parent sections, the bank
reconciliation should use the same logic to be able to reconcile
transactions from any section.

( and AccountingTransaction_getDestinationPaymentItemList )

772033ed removed
`parent_strict_group_uid` related key and added support to generate
`strict_parent_group_uid` related key

This was not following the signature of the real method

backport nexedi/erp5/merge_requests/469 to fix [Tracking issue for a specific user](https://www.erp5.com/project_section/capago-project/forum/Tracking-issue-for-a-specific-user-NfPPKu12hc)




/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/3