And use searchAndActivate instead of cloning all events in current transaction

Refactor code to get domain directly instead of restrictedTraverse and remove base domain id hardcoded

Check that configuring the Event Path on Campaign, all events are created according to the domain selected

Pass first name and last name together and fix code to not get social_title when not exists. It can happens when the context is a Organisation.

Initial implementation of Event Path and extension of Campaign to create massive events. Event Path is a subobject of Campaign to store all information related to creation of events

Make sure erp5-hr can override erp5_base.

This reverts commit 970d1d19,
which breaks many unit tests.

Also fix a regression in erp5_web, which was introduced when naming convention
test was reapplied.

fix lint warning: unexpected end of line; it is ambiguous whether these lines are part of the same statement

otherwise installation fails if a business template contains OOo document in PathTemplateItem.

"Location" is also used for redirection, so it cannot be used. Use a
similar but non-standard harder instead.

Later, we might want to do more processing after loading, or before dumping,
accessing private Message data.

When an object is deleted, higher level code used to flush its messages (without
invoking them). However, a concurrent and very long transaction may be about to
activate such an object, without conflict. We already experienced false -3
errors that could prevent other messages to be validated.

Because there is no efficient and reliable way to flush absolutely all messages,
messages on deleted objects are now ignored and deleted without any email
notification. There's only a WARNING in logs. But for performance reasons,
there's still a flush on object deletion.

To simplify code, messages that went to -3 for other reasons, like a
non-existing method, now go to -2. In fact, this was already the case for
grouped messages.

In case that a path is recycled, it may still be possible for a message to be
executed on a wrong object (the new one), instead of being ignored (because the
activated object was deleted). So in such scenario, developer should make sure
not to delete an object that may be activated in a concurrent transaction.
If the original object has an OID at the moment it is activated, an assertion
will make sure the message is not executed on another object.