- also some cleanup

Note that Set type setter still keeps the default one if exists.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!862

This property sheet was missing, but test passed because both the
setSourceReference and getSourceReference were acquired

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!998

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!999

Now ERP5JS display list mode header only if the jio key does not contain
/, so if we open a module with a hand-made URL with a trailing slash,
it's no longer seen as a module.

Repair this test by using a URL without that trailing / in the key.

The counter was not managed properly, it was never increased, so when
there was more than one assertion, they were all using the same
reference image.

Implement also the TODO that prevented to re-run a test.

This only happens in rare condition:
 * products where updated and ERP5VCS is moved to portal_components
 * everything is updated except erp5_forge
 * preferences for VCS working copies is set

not sure anybody still use this, but let's repair it.

Fix an unexpected typo.
See nexedi/erp5@71a3f9af

* Fix the problem that preference cache was not reset when `setPreferredSomething` was called, only when `edit(preferred_something=)`
* Implement something more advanced than just `portal_cache.clearCache()` so that when a user change their preference, only preference of this user are affected.
* Increase default cache duration, now that we invalidate caches properly.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!983

By using a magic comment such as

```javascript
   // erp5_monaco_editor_include: ../other.js other
```
we can tell monaco editor that other.js will be loaded before the
current javascript file, which helps the typescript compiler in
diagnosing errors and providing completions.

rsvp, renderjs and jio are still always loaded because they are used in
almost all our javscripts.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!969

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!993

When updating persistent to >= 4.4 `__repr__` of zope objects display
information about ZODB connection but it's more useful to have
information about the acquisition chain at this level.

This happens because `persistent.Persistent.__repr__` is used instead of 
`OFS.SimpleItem.Item.__repr__` (as of zope 2.13 ).

One notable case was proxy field error messages, it was supposed to
include the path of the proxy field in the error message. This one is
fixed by fixing the MRO so that persistent.Persistent does not appear
first.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!991

testXHTML was testing only document contained in modules, this take another approach to test all portal types and fixes the problems found now that we test views of all portal types.

The number of tests in testXHTML also increase from 864 to 1137.

/reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!992

Without this, subclassing defining this method will have arguments-differ
pylint warning because the signature of Base._checkConsistency is
different.

These scripts are used to check the site configuration and also in
CodingStyleTest.

This is just the minimal so that CodingStyleTest can run, but this could
be extended to several scripts currently in erp5_toolbox skinfolder of
erp5_forge which overlaps with erp5_administration. Also, regarding
CodingStyleTest, it seems that erp5_administration contain a lot of
things, so we may want to extract a smaller business template containing
only the scripts used for static analysis of business template.

We want this check to run on all components.

Module is an acceptable prefix for modules

Introduce a list of skins IDs that does not match our conventions but
are acceptable because this is what external API are calling.

Some portal types such as Business Template were not tested by testXHTML
because this tests started by modules and recursively tests views based
on allowed content types. Because of this approach, types that are not
created in a module but in a tool were never tested.

With unittest, the only way to dynamically add test methods to a class
is to generate a test class in test_suite function. At this stage, the
ERP5 site is not created yet, so the test had to introspects business
templates XML.

This now uses a slightly different approach, instead of finding modules
and chain of allowed content types from business template XML, we only
use business template to introspect the list of actions.
The lookup of the appropriate containers is no longer done before setup
by static analysis of business templates XML, but later once the site is
created, by dynamic analysis of the modules and allowed content types on
the running ERP5 site during the test method.
If we don't find a chain of portal types, we create the test document in
portal_trash, a tool without filter of content types.

This way, we can test all views of all portal types. This revealed a few
problems:
 - we need developer role to create components in portal_components, for
this we add developer role to the current user.
 - Delivery Cell portal type looks not used, there are no container
accepting it. We don't test delivery cell views for this reason.
 - VCS view on business template needs preferences and working copy
setup. We just mark this test as expected failure for now.
 - Solver Decision has a form conditionnaly displayed when there's a
relation to a solver, but this test does not evaluate action conditions
and does not allow to call a script (that would made it possible to
modify the document so that the condition is true). For now we also
mark this as expected failure.

Delivery Cell is not really used these days and cannot be created in
testXHTML, so drop these useless views.

For reference, the same views still exists on all other movements portal
types, so we don't "loose anything important" by removing the views
here.

The corresponding form, BudgetTransfer_viewBudgetTransferLine does not
exist, so mark view as not visible for now so that it's not tested.

This redirects to another site, so it is not really a view action.

This also confuses testXHTML.