- 02 Jun, 2017 12 commits
-
-
Sebastien Robin authored
-
Sebastien Robin authored
-
Sebastien Robin authored
-
Sebastien Robin authored
-
Sebastien Robin authored
-
iv authored
-
iv authored
it was a coincidence that the first event was set by edit_workflow during initialization: it was due to workflow list not sorted in chains_by_type
-
iv authored
Variable type is now called Workflow Variable Add automatic_update property on variables Rename initial_value to variable_value
-
wenjie.zheng authored
-
Sebastien Robin authored
- general refactoring (renaming variables and methods for better consistency, improving views, fixing tests, ...) - performance improvements - rework of guards - rewriting permission/roles matrix on state - use patched version of updateRolesMappingFor and rework it for cases of many workflows setting different roles for the same permission - fixes of troubles when having prefixed state/transition/script in new workflows - ...
-
wenjie.zheng authored
-
Cédric Le Ninivin authored
-
- 01 Jun, 2017 3 commits
-
-
Kirill Smelkov authored
ZBigArrays were omitted from being saved in notebooks in 5fb16acd (erp5_data_notebook: Don't save ZBigArray in data notebook. It may be too big that zope process may crash.). However since ZBigArrays are regular ZODB objects with persistent references to other ZODB objects there is no reason for us not to be able to serialize them. Add corresponding FIXME with link to more context. /reviewed-by TrustMe
-
Sebastien Robin authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
Currently the full-upgrade alarm calls the 3 upgrade-related-alarm's activeSense methods in activities. As activeSense method runs Alarm's methods in activities too, the final activities do not get the good "tag" and "after_tag" values, which creates a lack of depency between them. In consequence, if we are not running the real upgrade (= just activeSense), no need to run post-upgrade's activeSense : indeed, post-upgrade constraints will be run on what are *currently* installed, and not on the result of the previous steps of the upgrader, which lead to a wrong and misleading consistency check. This Merge Request intends to fix it by : * Adding a "activate_kw" parameter to activeSense method, which allow to configure its internal call to "activate" * Improving upgrader to remove the useless calls to activeSense, and properly parameterize activeSense's activity generation /reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!276
-
- 31 May, 2017 2 commits
-
-
Sebastien Robin authored
For new developments, we should use portal_components. So move theses tests to portal_components before Workflow changes.
-
Sebastien Robin authored
There is no selenium tests yet, but at least we can see the same graph rendered with different gadgets. Later, we will have to find smart ways for testing graphs
-
- 30 May, 2017 6 commits
-
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
[erp5_officejs_appstore_base] configuration_latest_version is set when acception the Software Publication
-
Cédric Le Ninivin authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
Fix web section templates. Fix appcache for the redirect app.
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
FullUpgrade Alarm relies on getLastActiveProcess to return results, which makes use of the catalog to return a result. If the Active Processes spawned by the 3 Alarms composing the upgrader (pre, upgrade, post) are not indexed before the FullUpgrade Alarm collects the results, then the wrong active result is returned, which then give the wrong feedback to the user. It seems that the "defaultActivateParameterDict" method cannot overwrite the "tag" parameter of indexation activities (even if it was working for after_tag). This is why this commit is needed.
-
Tristan Cavelier authored
to fit original script behavior, from erp5_web skin folder. Also fixes "KeyError: TraversalRequestNameStack" from `WebPage.getDocumentValue(reference)` on the "View" skin selection.
-
- 29 May, 2017 17 commits
-
-
Sven Franck authored
-
Cédric Le Ninivin authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
This activate_kw is a dict passed to internal 'activate' called in order to more controls on activities created by activeSense
-
Nicolas Wavrant authored
As results may be inconsistent as long as pre-upgrade and upgrade steps have been run for real
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Romain Courteaud authored
-
Jérome Perrin authored
To make it easier for users to change their preferences, so that they do not have to create the preference themselves, we tried to pre-create a user preference ready to be configured for each user. It was 59860df3 : an interaction to create a user preference on `Person.setReference` which is more or less the time when this person become a user ( but not really - this was already a weakness of this approach). This calls `Person_createUserPreference` that initialize the preference by introspecting the assignments of the person. This already had a problem that it was working only if the assignments were created before the reference was set on the person. With the new user management introduced in !185 this interaction moved to `Person.setUserId`, which is called in Person's init script. This had the following problems: - All persons have a user id, so all persons have a preference. For sites with many persons that are not actually users, this create useless preferences. - During init, person does not have assignments yet, so `Person_createUserPreference` could not use information from assignment to create preference. The suggested change is to create the preference only when the user click on *Edit my preferences* button. This is done by adding a new `portal_preferences.getActiveUserPreference` method that returns the active user preference and create it if not already existing, this way we do not have to put logic in the user interface scripts. All *Edit my preferences* links should use it like it was done in f62e6651 The `person_interaction_workflow` was completely remove, as the other interaction it was containing - clearCache when deleting the person - was useless . We had to adjust a few tests that was passing thanks to this interaction. /cc @gabriel @vpelletier @kazuhiko @tc /reviewed-on nexedi/erp5!273
-