1. 17 Dec, 2018 1 commit
  2. 12 Sep, 2018 1 commit
  3. 11 Sep, 2018 1 commit
  4. 07 Sep, 2018 2 commits
  5. 04 Apr, 2018 1 commit
    • Merge !504 Do not save documents when there are pending activities · 16de28d5
      When document has pending activities, we refuse changing ID ( because there might be pending `updateRelatedContent` activities if I remember correctly ), but it's done in a way that breaks the "atomic" aspect of the transaction a bit, because we
      
      As a result, this happens sometimes that not all properties user changed are modified. In the example below, the change to *Include Documents in Site Map* is not saved (and also change to *ID*):
      
      ![erp5-sorryPendingActivitiesSavePartially](/uploads/ff4bfd6ad0e8a42ba3684cccdc450e21/erp5-sorryPendingActivitiesSavePartially.gif)
      
      ( screencast of editing a document to change ids and several other
      properties - after clicking save, we can see that changing id is refused
      because there is pending activities. Other properties that where changes
      at the same times are not all modified, which breaks the
      transactionality we can usally expect when editing documents in ERP5 )
      
      The changed here is to use a field validator that refused editing when there are pending activities, so that user gets a:
      
      ![erp5-pending-activiities](/uploads/bfe825560bdee34f0443e8e36884f21c/erp5-pending-activiities.png)
      
      ( screenshot of the change: now edition is rejected )
      
      and the result is either all changes are applied or no change is applied at all.
      
      This is done by:
       * introducing a new `my_view_mode_id` field in `erp5_core`'s `Base_viewFieldLibrary`
       * using this field as proxy field of all editable `my_id` fields. Maybe I forgot some business templates, I changed only the most common ones. I intentionally did not change all fields of `erp5_ui_test` because I think they are used to compare speed of proxy fields vs traditional fields.
      
      0352f50fd543fda2712bb8ca93d8a8814f975a26 introduces a Zelenium test exercising this new behavior.
      
      /reviewed-on !504
      
      Conflicts:
      	product/ERP5/bootstrap/erp5_core/SkinTemplateItem/portal_skins/erp5_core/Base_viewFieldLibrary.xml
      Jérome Perrin committed
  6. 09 Mar, 2018 1 commit
  7. 07 Feb, 2018 1 commit
  8. 18 Jan, 2018 1 commit
  9. 19 Dec, 2017 1 commit
  10. 27 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  11. 21 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  12. 14 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  13. 06 Nov, 2017 1 commit
  14. 31 Oct, 2017 2 commits
  15. 25 Oct, 2017 1 commit
  16. 03 Oct, 2017 1 commit
  17. 01 Sep, 2017 3 commits
  18. 25 Aug, 2017 1 commit
  19. 29 Jun, 2017 1 commit
  20. 18 May, 2017 1 commit
  21. 13 Apr, 2017 1 commit
  22. 08 Mar, 2017 1 commit
    • Stop calling deprecated ERP5Site_getAuthenticatedMemberPersonValue. · ebbed4e7
      git grep -l ERP5Site_getAuthenticatedMemberPersonValue | xargs sed -i 's!\.ERP5Site_getAuthenticatedMemberPersonValue()!.getPortalObject().portal_membership.getAuthenticatedMember().getUserValue()!g'
      Plus s/portal.getPortalObject()/portal/g where modified by above regex.
      Plus manual edits of the few remaining matches.
      Special mention for DiscussionThreadModule_addReply, which forgot to
      actually call the script.
      Vincent Pelletier committed
  23. 18 Jan, 2017 1 commit
  24. 12 Jan, 2017 1 commit
  25. 23 Dec, 2016 3 commits
  26. 19 Dec, 2016 1 commit
  27. 26 Oct, 2016 1 commit
  28. 14 Oct, 2016 1 commit
  29. 19 Sep, 2016 1 commit
  30. 27 Jun, 2016 1 commit
  31. 24 Jun, 2016 3 commits
  32. 23 Jun, 2016 1 commit