backport nexedi/erp5!630

There was conflicts, because we have already backported
nexedi/erp5!137/

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/19

TODO:

 * [ ] file as bug
 * [ ] unify implementation with Base_getAccountingPeriodStartDateForSectionCategory
 * [ ] MR for nexedi/erp5
 * [ ] capago: stop creating accounting period for durban in `ERP5Site_openCapagoAccountingPeriod`, this was just hiding the bug

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/20

This script was returning organisations in random order !

When organisation does not have accounting periods, but another organisation at the same level of the same group has, the result was undefined.

This fixes by considering all organisation from the same group.

Fix for [#20171205-E91759](https://nexedi.erp5.net/bug_module/20171205-E91759)

Basically extend the change from
24c836a7 to the case where there's an
exception, but the exception does not match and add tests to reproduce
the case.

Backport nexedi/erp5!611

To fix problem reported as [Reports in French even with English selected for the UI](https://www.erp5.com/project_section/capago-project/forum/Reports-in-French-even-with-English-selected-for-the-UI-2iRze6Od6s)


/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/18

Backport of nexedi/erp5!627

to fix test failures from https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/capago/merge_requests/302#note_58587

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/17

Report content and also notification subject must be translated.

The attachment filename at this point is not translated, but it would be
nice to have I feel.

by evaluating it in a translationContext

Some report sections may be using translation.

Localizer.get_selected_language is only functional in response to user
requests. Saving it in Base_computeReportSection was already too late
because it's already an activity request.

This code was slightly different in three places:
 * Base_activateSimpleView: only use request.form.items()
 * Base_activateReport: use request.items()
 * Base_computeReportSection: use request.items()

request.items returns all items from request.other, request.form and
request.cookies.
In all cases, we are interested in request.form, so that report runs
with the same user input in request. We want to restore restore
request.other for Base_computeReportSection , but it does not harm in
other cases.
We always drop cookies to fix  #20180220-1DBF516 (as a consequence the
request will not strictly be identical, but rendering reports should not
depend on cookies)

This was used to control predicate matrix of Accounting Rule Cells,
which is not longer used in new simulation.

This was used for "Predicate Matrix" in invoice transaction rule of old
simulation ( the matrix of "Accounting Rule Cell"s ).

This is not longer used in new simulation.

Implement the remaining tasks from nexedi/erp5!173 and fix [#20170709-17309B6](https://nexedi.erp5.net/bug_module/20170709-17309B6)

Backport of nexedi/erp5!580

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/16

only covers interface compliance and high level parts of sending

User triggering action to send SMS does not have view permission on
Gateway

after using Base_setDefaultSecurity to initialize security

Implementation dependant parameters, such as message type or quality,
must be defined by the gateway class, not in the common
ShortMessage_send script.

This should make it easier to switch implementations.

Also:
 * send method is expected to be called once per recipient. I guess we
   prefer to isolate messages than to batch send messages efficiently.
 * send method expect relative url of sender and reciever documents, so
   that it can decide which properties to use.
 * drop `sender_title` parameter, now the gateway implementation decide
   what to use.
 * drop `test` parameter. For simulation mode, set simulation mode on
   the gateway instance
 * sms.send() no longer accept direct from_url / to_url / body message.
   It only supports sending what's defined on document properties.
 * SMSTool_afterSend will be called with message_id parameter, not
   message_id_list
 * Split interfaces in two SMS Sending / SMS Receiving.

Backport nexedi/erp5!519 ( while
still WIP )

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/13

Backport nexedi/erp5!535

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/14

Because source reference is non editable on PaymentTransactionGroup_view and reset by Delivery_afterClone

This workflow is also used on web sites and web sections.

Usually, we never delete data in ERP5, but keeping old categories and
old websections are sometimes a problem, because tegories and web
sections' IDs have a meaning.

Expired state already provides similar functionality that the deleted
state we usually have on workflows.

It's anyway "possible" to delete: Managers just switch to ZMI to delete,
non managers use "cut and paste" trick.

( see also comments in scripts/deleteDocument )

backport nexedi/erp5!515

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/12

This is enabled for title and description only, because that's usually
what we put on "external" documents such as invoices.

By "resource" here it means products, services, components and their
individual variations

backport nexedi/erp5!449

/reviewed-on https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5-capago/merge_requests/11

This way, code mirror shows the history of editions.

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.