Repository navigation
[20.0][MIG] base - #6068
Open
hbrunn wants to merge 115 commits into
Open
[20.0][MIG] base#6068hbrunn wants to merge 115 commits into
hbrunn wants to merge 115 commits into
Conversation
- Apply new copier template. (from v1.14.2 to v1.18 : replace setup by pyproject.toml, replace black by ruff, ...) - Disable .github/workflows/test.yml because the openupgrade is not initialized yet - add new empty modules160-170.rst file
…de is not initialized yet
.github/workflows/test.yml
-This commit remove unecessary patch -Check if test exist then execute it in the test.yml -Remove the test loader from patch, detail at OCA#4327 (comment)
account_peppol by now
…run scripts" This reverts commit 576daf1.
…path does not exist
OCA-git-bot
added
mod:openupgrade_scripts
Member
Author
|
/ocabot migration base |
1 of 6 tasks
FerDeNetlab
reviewed
Oct 28, 2026
FerDeNetlab
left a comment
FerDeNetlab
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tested on our 19.0 db (131 modules after the upgrade, with our module scripts on top): same result as with our own base scripts, apart from the line below. load_data of noupdate_changes.xml needs OCA/openupgradelib#468 on 20.0.
Drafted with AI assistance (Claude Opus 5.5), reviewed by me.
Comment on lines
+190
to
+193
| WHERE | ||
| ir_model_fields.model_id=ir_model.id | ||
| AND | ||
| ir_model.state='manual' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This only covers fields of custom models. Manual fields on standard models lose their index: the analytic plan columns (account.analytic.line.x_plan2_id, project.project.x_plan2_id, ...) are index=True in our 19.0 db and end up with index=NULL. The database index itself is kept, only ir.model.fields is wrong. With this change all 4 come out as btree.
Suggested change
| WHERE | |
| ir_model_fields.model_id=ir_model.id | |
| AND | |
| ir_model.state='manual' | |
| WHERE | |
| ir_model_fields.model_id=ir_model.id | |
| AND | |
| (ir_model.state='manual' OR ir_model_fields.state='manual') |
This branch has not been deployed
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
depends on:
I'll rebase after those are merged and the
PR has been merged and generated the first updated analysis