New production module

[udono, 2011-03-29 07:58:52]

The module looks good. 

* I miss a view, which shows the BOM setup of a 
  product, like a nested tree::

    Product/BOM                    quantity UOM
    -------------------------------------------

    * Product A                           1 u
        BOM 1
            * Product B                   3 u
                BOM 3
                    * Product D          10 u
                    * Product E          10 u
            * Product A.2
                BOM 4
                    * Product F          16 u
        BOM 2
            * Product C                   2 u
    -----------------------------------------

* I have not found any recursion check for the BOM input 
  and outputs. Is it not needed?

* Why is it needed to have to define the output-product 
  twice? First time I declare the output product in 
  Production Management > Configuration > BOM's and next 
  time I must enable the specific BOM on the product itself.

  For me a product which is an output product in one or 
  more BOM's, could have always added these BOM's.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/INSTALL
File INSTALL (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/INSTALL#newcode2
INSTALL:2: =============================
is this name good? Is it not better to name it production_bom? But I have no
idea, if a base production module can or should not be separated from bom
functionality.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/production.xml
File production.xml (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/production.xml#newcode15
production.xml:15: <menuitem name="Production Management" id="menu_production"
sequence="10"/>
In the test installation the menu entry Production Management is ordered after
Administration. But I think administration should be the last menu entry.

[ced, 2011-04-03 13:20:35]

On 2011/03/29 07:58:52, udono wrote:
> The module looks good. 
> 
> * I miss a view, which shows the BOM setup of a 
>   product, like a nested tree::
> 
>     Product/BOM                    quantity UOM
>     -------------------------------------------
> 
>     * Product A                           1 u
>         BOM 1
>             * Product B                   3 u
>                 BOM 3
>                     * Product D          10 u
>                     * Product E          10 u
>             * Product A.2
>                 BOM 4
>                     * Product F          16 u
>         BOM 2
>             * Product C                   2 u
>     -----------------------------------------

This is not a trivial things because the quantity value must depend of the
quantity of the parent but the same line can be displayed many times. I will
think about a solution.

> * I have not found any recursion check for the BOM input 
>   and outputs. Is it not needed?

I don't know. I think you could have a production where all input products are
not used but it is required to have them.

> * Why is it needed to have to define the output-product 
>   twice? First time I declare the output product in 
>   Production Management > Configuration > BOM's and next 
>   time I must enable the specific BOM on the product itself.

On the product you define which BOM can be used to produce this product. But you
could have other BOM's that also product this one but not in an optimal way.

>   For me a product which is an output product in one or 
>   more BOM's, could have always added these BOM's.
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/INSTALL
> File INSTALL (right):
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/INSTALL#newcode2
> INSTALL:2: =============================
> is this name good? Is it not better to name it production_bom? But I have no
> idea, if a base production module can or should not be separated from bom
> functionality.

I hope to complete it later with production order etc.
 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/production.xml
> File production.xml (right):
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/1/production.xml#newcode15
> production.xml:15: <menuitem name="Production Management" id="menu_production"
> sequence="10"/>
> In the test installation the menu entry Production Management is ordered after
> Administration. But I think administration should be the last menu entry.

Patch submited

[udono, 2011-10-15 16:44:45]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.py#newcode33
bom.py:33: return quantity / output.quantity
Missing copy method. It is not possible to duplicate BOMS.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.xml
File bom.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.xml#newcode241
bom.xml:241: <field name="window" eval="True"/>
Iam not sure if it is good to use window here.
When making a sale quotation using a product with bom, open this product, and
show the BOM Tree, the wizard open in the background window. So I need to close
some dialog windows, to check the bom tree.

But maybe it is a little misconception for window wizards, to use always the
main window in background, even, when there is a dialog open, which restricts
the edition of the backround window?

What do you think?

[ced, 2011-11-14 10:29:38]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.py#newcode33
bom.py:33: return quantity / output.quantity
On 2011/10/15 16:44:45, udono wrote:
> Missing copy method. It is not possible to duplicate BOMS.

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.xml
File bom.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/35001/bom.xml#newcode241
bom.xml:241: <field name="window" eval="True"/>
On 2011/10/15 16:44:45, udono wrote:
> Iam not sure if it is good to use window here.
> When making a sale quotation using a product with bom, open this product, and
> show the BOM Tree, the wizard open in the background window. So I need to
close
> some dialog windows, to check the bom tree.
> 
> But maybe it is a little misconception for window wizards, to use always the
> main window in background, even, when there is a dialog open, which restricts
> the edition of the backround window?
> 
> What do you think?

This is something no more possible in 2.2 as the relate buttons are only show in
main tabs. But there is still the right click.
But any way, with the no-modal you can switch from one tab to an other even if
there is a popup.

[udono, 2011-12-07 01:33:40]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
File bom.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
This wizard is no longer working in 2.2. if I open a related Bom tree record and
set the values, nothing happend after pressing 'ok'.

[udono, 2011-12-07 01:55:18]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
File bom.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
No error message in client and server log.

[udono, 2011-12-07 10:56:25]

On 2011/12/07 01:55:18, udono wrote:
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
> File bom.xml (right):
> 
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
> bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
> No error message in client and server log.

When I use patch http://codereview.tryton.org/194002 the wizard works.

[ced, 2011-12-07 10:56:54]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
File bom.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
On 2011/12/07 01:33:41, udono wrote:
> This wizard is no longer working in 2.2. if I open a related Bom tree record
and
> set the values, nothing happend after pressing 'ok'.

The version is based on trunk and I just test it the wizard and it works.
I also test on 2.2 and it also works.

[udono, 2011-12-07 11:09:10]

On 2011/12/07 10:56:54, ced wrote:
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
> File bom.xml (right):
> 
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
> bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
> On 2011/12/07 01:33:41, udono wrote:
> > This wizard is no longer working in 2.2. if I open a related Bom tree record
> and
> > set the values, nothing happend after pressing 'ok'.
> 
> The version is based on trunk and I just test it the wizard and it works.
> I also test on 2.2 and it also works.
It opens the bom tree? On my side it opens nothing, the wizard just closes
without any feetback, an Iam back on the products view where I started the
wizard. Strange.

[udono, 2011-12-07 11:35:34]

On 2011/12/07 11:09:10, udono wrote:
> On 2011/12/07 10:56:54, ced wrote:
> > https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
> > File bom.xml (right):
> > 
> > https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
> > bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
> > On 2011/12/07 01:33:41, udono wrote:
> > > This wizard is no longer working in 2.2. if I open a related Bom tree
record
> > and
> > > set the values, nothing happend after pressing 'ok'.
> > 
> > The version is based on trunk and I just test it the wizard and it works.
> > I also test on 2.2 and it also works.
> It opens the bom tree? On my side it opens nothing, the wizard just closes
> without any feetback, an Iam back on the products view where I started the
> wizard. Strange.

Scenario:

* trytond 2.2 on tip from repos http://hg.tryton.org/2.2/trytond
* installed module from this codereview patch set 6
* Setup
  * Create a Bom with some input products, qty, uom. Create an output product,
qty, uom.
  * Open Product form, choose output product
  * Choose action "Open a related record..." / Bom tree
  * In the window wizard give a quantity, press OK
    * IS: Now the wizard closes, and you are back at the Product form
    * SHOULD: The wizard should close and open a tree view with 
      the BOM, titled as "BOM Tree".

[udono, 2011-12-07 11:41:35]

On 2011/12/07 11:35:34, udono wrote:
> On 2011/12/07 11:09:10, udono wrote:
> > On 2011/12/07 10:56:54, ced wrote:
> > > https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml
> > > File bom.xml (right):
> > > 
> > > https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/52001/bom.xml#newcode225
> > > bom.xml:225: <record model="ir.action.wizard" id="wizard_bom_tree_open">
> > > On 2011/12/07 01:33:41, udono wrote:
> > > > This wizard is no longer working in 2.2. if I open a related Bom tree
> record
> > > and
> > > > set the values, nothing happend after pressing 'ok'.
> > > 
> > > The version is based on trunk and I just test it the wizard and it works.
> > > I also test on 2.2 and it also works.
> > It opens the bom tree? On my side it opens nothing, the wizard just closes
> > without any feetback, an Iam back on the products view where I started the
> > wizard. Strange.
> 
> Scenario:
> 
> * trytond 2.2 on tip from repos http://hg.tryton.org/2.2/trytond
> * installed module from this codereview patch set 6
> * Setup
>   * Create a Bom with some input products, qty, uom. Create an output product,
> qty, uom.
>   * Open Product form, choose output product
>   * Choose action "Open a related record..." / Bom tree
>   * In the window wizard give a quantity, press OK
>     * IS: Now the wizard closes, and you are back at the Product form
>     * SHOULD: The wizard should close and open a tree view with 
>       the BOM, titled as "BOM Tree".

Hum, now it works without patch on my side, too. Stranger then strange. I test a
little more.

[bch, 2011-12-20 13:32:06]

On 2011/04/03 13:20:35, ced wrote:
> On 2011/03/29 07:58:52, udono wrote:

> > * Why is it needed to have to define the output-product 
> >   twice? First time I declare the output product in 
> >   Production Management > Configuration > BOM's and next 
> >   time I must enable the specific BOM on the product itself.
> 
> On the product you define which BOM can be used to produce this product. But
you
> could have other BOM's that also product this one but not in an optimal way.

A solution would be to add a boolean on the production.bom.output model that
tells if this output is the preferred way to produce this product.

[ced, 2012-02-14 09:16:58]

On 20/12/11 13:32 +0000, bertrand.chenal@b2ck.com wrote:
> On 2011/04/03 13:20:35, ced wrote:
> >On 2011/03/29 07:58:52, udono wrote:
> 
> >> * Why is it needed to have to define the output-product
> >>   twice? First time I declare the output product in
> >>   Production Management > Configuration > BOM's and next
> >>   time I must enable the specific BOM on the product itself.
> 
> >On the product you define which BOM can be used to produce this
> product. But you
> >could have other BOM's that also product this one but not in an
> optimal way.
> 
> A solution would be to add a boolean on the production.bom.output model
> that tells if this output is the preferred way to produce this product.

Also the current design allow the definition of BOM in 2 steps.

    - Creation of a new BOM by the user in charge of it.
    - Put the BOM in production which means switch to the new BOM. This
      could be the job of someone else.

-- 
Cédric Krier

B2CK SPRL
Rue de Rotterdam, 4
4000 Liège
Belgium
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Email/Jabber: cedric.krier@b2ck.com
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

[albertnan, 2012-02-22 07:50:51]

On 2012/02/15 15:02:56, ced wrote:

LGTM

[yangoon, 2012-04-07 12:48:04]

Only superficial review, untested

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/INSTALL
File INSTALL (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/INSTALL#newcode10
INSTALL:10: * trytond_stock (http://www.tryton.org/)
company missing

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/__init__.py
File __init__.py (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/__init__.py#newcode4
__init__.py:4: import configuration
Why not using relative imports?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py#newcode60
bom.py:60: 'product.uom.category', 'Uom Category',
You should handle abbreviations one way application-wide: so here UOM

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py#newcode83
bom.py:83: 'recursive_bom': 'You can not create recursive boms!',
BOMs

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py#newcode148
bom.py:148: "Bill of Material OutPut"
Output

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.xml
File bom.xml (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.xml#newcode11
bom.xml:11: <tree string="BOM's">
BOMs

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.xml#newcode41
bom.xml:41: <field name="name">BOM's</field>
BOMs

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst
File doc/index.rst (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode4
doc/index.rst:4: The production module defines fundamentals for production
management: Bill of
fundamentals -> basics should be a better match

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode17
doc/index.rst:17: A Production is mainly define by a product, a BOM, a location,
a quantity and
- is defined
- mention, that BOM is the abbreviation of Bill of Material

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode18
doc/index.rst:18: two list of moves:
lists

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode23
doc/index.rst:23: defined on the arehouse) for products used for production.
warehouse

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode42
doc/index.rst:42: The production is waiting and all moves are still in draft.
What is the difference to state draft then?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode61
doc/index.rst:61: incoming products. If a product is selected, it will have the
cost as unit
each incoming products -> each incoming product or all incoming products

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/doc/index.rst#newcode62
doc/index.rst:62: price. The production verify that all the cost is spreaded on
the unit price of
verifies
is spread

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/product.py
File product.py (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/product.py#newcode11
product.py:11: 'BOM\'s', order=[('sequence', 'ASC'), ('id', 'ASC')])
BOMs

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/product.py#newcode19
product.py:19: 'recursive_bom': 'You can not create recursive boms!',
BOMs

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/product.xml
File product.xml (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/product.xml#newcode11
product.xml:11: <tree string="Product - BOM's">
BOMs, as always
it is not a genitive, it is a plural

[ced, 2012-04-07 19:00:48]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py#newcode60
bom.py:60: 'product.uom.category', 'Uom Category',
On 2012/04/07 12:48:04, yangoon wrote:
> You should handle abbreviations one way application-wide: so here UOM

Uom is used more often in Tryton.

[yangoon, 2012-04-08 09:18:42]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/117002/bom.py#newcode60
bom.py:60: 'product.uom.category', 'Uom Category',
On 2012/04/07 19:00:49, ced wrote:
> On 2012/04/07 12:48:04, yangoon wrote:
> > You should handle abbreviations one way application-wide: so here UOM
> 
> Uom is used more often in Tryton.

Then this should be changed.

[udono, 2012-04-12 05:29:08]

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/stock.xml
File stock.xml (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/stock.xml#newcode35
stock.xml:35: 
When try to install the module, with the next part I get the error:

[Thu Apr 12 03:02:55 2012] INFO:modules:production:loading stock.xml
[Thu Apr 12 03:02:56 2012] ERROR:sql:Wrong SQL: INSERT INTO "stock_location"
("code","right","name","active","type","left", create_uid, create_date) VALUES (
'PROD', 0, 'Production', true, 'production', 0, 0,
'2012-04-12T03:02:56.014858'::timestamp) RETURNING id
/trytond/trytond/model/modelsql.py:362: DeprecationWarning: With-statements now
directly support multiple context managers
  Transaction().set_user(0)):
[Thu Apr 12 03:02:56 2012] ERROR:convert:Error while parsing xml file:
In tag record: model stock.location with id location_production.
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/bin/trytond.py", line 7, in <module>
    execfile(__file__)
  File "/trytond/bin/trytond", line 105, in <module>
    trytond.server.TrytonServer(options).run()
  File "/trytond/trytond/server.py", line 138, in run
    Pool(db_name).init(update=update, lang=lang)
  File "/trytond/trytond/pool.py", line 120, in init
    lang=lang)
  File "/trytond/trytond/modules/__init__.py", line 397, in load_modules
    load_module_graph(graph, pool, lang)
  File "/trytond/trytond/modules/__init__.py", line 240, in load_module_graph
    tryton_parser.parse_xmlstream(fp)
  File "/trytond/trytond/convert.py", line 416, in parse_xmlstream
    self.sax_parser.parse(source)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/xml/sax/expatreader.py", line 107, in parse
    xmlreader.IncrementalParser.parse(self, source)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/xml/sax/xmlreader.py", line 123, in parse
    self.feed(buffer)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/xml/sax/expatreader.py", line 207, in feed
    self._parser.Parse(data, isFinal)
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/xml/sax/expatreader.py", line 304, in end_element
    self._cont_handler.endElement(name)
  File "/trytond/trytond/convert.py", line 463, in endElement
    self.taghandler = self.taghandler.endElement(name)
  File "/trytond/trytond/convert.py", line 258, in endElement
    self.mh.import_record(self.model._name, self.values, self.xml_id)
  File "/trytond/trytond/convert.py", line 748, in import_record
    db_id = object_ref.create(values)
  File "/trytond/trytond/modules/stock/location.py", line 221, in create
    res = super(Location, self).create(vals)
  File "/trytond/trytond/model/modelsql.py", line 372, in create
    field_name))
  File "/trytond/trytond/error.py", line 69, in raise_user_error
    raise UserError(error)
trytond.exceptions.UserError: ('UserError', (u'The field "Right" on "Stock
Location" is required.', ''))

[ced, 2012-04-12 08:48:47]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/stock.xml
File stock.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/stock.xml#newcode35
stock.xml:35: 
On 2012/04/12 05:29:08, udono wrote:
> When try to install the module, with the next part I get the error:
> trytond.exceptions.UserError: ('UserError', (u'The field "Right" on "Stock
> Location" is required.', ''))

I can not reproduce.
Are you sure you are up to date with trytond and stock

[udono, 2012-04-13 07:38:11]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/stock.xml
File stock.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/stock.xml#newcode35
stock.xml:35: 
On 2012/04/12 08:48:47, ced wrote:
> I can not reproduce.
> Are you sure you are up to date with trytond and stock
I rebuild a new trytond instance with production module and now it installs
well.

[udono, 2012-04-13 08:29:32]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/__tryton__.py
File __tryton__.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/__tryton__.py#newcode5
__tryton__.py:5: 'version': '0.0.1',
Don't forget to fix version to 2.4.0 when release.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/bom.py#newcode20
bom.py:20: 'bom', 'product', 'Output Products')
I do not understand the use of the field output_products. Both refer to the same
table. Is it not similar to field outputs?

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/doc/index.rst
File doc/index.rst (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/doc/index.rst#newcode18
doc/index.rst:18: two lists of moves:
Is a product with BOM required for production? I can encode a production without
a product and BOM, just with input and output moves.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py
File production.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py#newcode139
production.py:139: 'missing_cost': 'It misses some cost on the outputs!',
This user error is always raised, when encoding a production without using
product and BOM only made of inputs and outputs.
With this setup the cost is always 0.00.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.xml
File production.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.xml#newcode157
production.xml:157: <field name="name">Request Productions</field>
Requested Productions

[ced, 2012-04-13 09:12:16]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/bom.py
File bom.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/bom.py#newcode20
bom.py:20: 'bom', 'product', 'Output Products')
On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> I do not understand the use of the field output_products. Both refer to the
same
> table. Is it not similar to field outputs?

It is to be able to write some domains.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/doc/index.rst
File doc/index.rst (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/doc/index.rst#newcode18
doc/index.rst:18: two lists of moves:
On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> Is a product with BOM required for production?

No.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py
File production.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py#newcode139
production.py:139: 'missing_cost': 'It misses some cost on the outputs!',
On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> This user error is always raised, when encoding a production without using
> product and BOM only made of inputs and outputs.
> With this setup the cost is always 0.00.

I explained it on the mailing list where nobody answers.

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.xml
File production.xml (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.xml#newcode157
production.xml:157: <field name="name">Request Productions</field>
On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> Requested Productions

The state is request.

[udono, 2012-04-13 10:13:10]

Save a production, after fill all required fields, the following error raises:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/trytond/protocols/jsonrpc.py", line 123, in _marshaled_dispatch
    response['result'] = dispatch_method(method, params)
  File "/trytond/protocols/jsonrpc.py", line 156, in _dispatch
    res = dispatch(*args)
  File "/trytond/protocols/dispatcher.py", line 155, in dispatch
    res = getattr(obj, method)(*args_without_context, **kargs)
  File "/trytond/model/modelsql.py", line 638, in read
    res2 = self._columns[field].get(ids, self, field_list, values=res)
  File "/trytond/model/fields/function.py", line 87, in get
    res[name] = getattr(model, self.getter)(ids, name)
  File "/trytond/modules/production/production.py", line 363, in
get_uom_category
    res[input.id] = input.product.default_uom.category.id
AttributeError: 'BrowseRecordNull' object has no attribute 'default_uom'

[udono, 2012-04-13 13:46:58]

On 2012/04/13 10:13:10, udono wrote:
> Save a production, after fill all required fields, the following error raises:
> 
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "/trytond/protocols/jsonrpc.py", line 123, in _marshaled_dispatch
>     response['result'] = dispatch_method(method, params)
>   File "/trytond/protocols/jsonrpc.py", line 156, in _dispatch
>     res = dispatch(*args)
>   File "/trytond/protocols/dispatcher.py", line 155, in dispatch
>     res = getattr(obj, method)(*args_without_context, **kargs)
>   File "/trytond/model/modelsql.py", line 638, in read
>     res2 = self._columns[field].get(ids, self, field_list, values=res)
>   File "/trytond/model/fields/function.py", line 87, in get
>     res[name] = getattr(model, self.getter)(ids, name)
>   File "/trytond/modules/production/production.py", line 363, in
> get_uom_category
>     res[input.id] = input.product.default_uom.category.id
> AttributeError: 'BrowseRecordNull' object has no attribute 'default_uom'

Thanks, works now, but followed by a new exception::

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/trytond/protocols/jsonrpc.py", line 123, in _marshaled_dispatch
    response['result'] = dispatch_method(method, params)
  File "/trytond/protocols/jsonrpc.py", line 156, in _dispatch
    res = dispatch(*args)
  File "/trytond/protocols/dispatcher.py", line 155, in dispatch
    res = getattr(obj, method)(*args_without_context, **kargs)
  File "/trytond/model/modelsql.py", line 638, in read
    res2 = self._columns[field].get(ids, self, field_list, values=res)
  File "/trytond/model/fields/function.py", line 87, in get
    res[name] = getattr(model, self.getter)(ids, name)
  File "/trytond/modules/production/production.py", line 379, in get_unit_digits
    digits[production.id] = production.uom.digits
AttributeError: 'BrowseRecordNull' object has no attribute 'digits'

[udono, 2012-04-13 14:39:17]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py
File production.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py#newcode139
production.py:139: 'missing_cost': 'It misses some cost on the outputs!',
On 2012/04/13 09:12:16, ced wrote:
> On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> > This user error is always raised, when encoding a production without using
> > product and BOM only made of inputs and outputs.
> > With this setup the cost is always 0.00.
> I explained it on the mailing list where nobody answers.
I read the description, but I can not get production working without product and
BOM.

My scenario is:

    * Install production patch and dependencies:
      company, country, currency, party, product, production, stock
      (N.B. No accounting modules!)
    * Create a new production
    * Fill required fields, but not Product and BOM
    * Input Product: qty 1 price 100
    * Output Product: qty 1 price 100
    * Check cost doesn't change
    * Save production: It misses some cost on the outputs!

[udono, 2012-04-13 15:53:11]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/129004/production.py
File production.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/129004/production.py#newcode120
production.py:120: | ~Eval('location')),
I checked this states with a production based on product and BOM. I changed the
quantity of the output when the production is in state 'running'. When I try to
set the state to done, I get the "It misses some cost on the outputs!" user
exception.

Why is the output editable up to state running?

[ced, 2012-04-13 16:19:26]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/129004/production.py
File production.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/129004/production.py#newcode120
production.py:120: | ~Eval('location')),
On 2012/04/13 15:53:11, udono wrote:
> I checked this states with a production based on product and BOM. I changed
the
> quantity of the output when the production is in state 'running'. When I try
to
> set the state to done, I get the "It misses some cost on the outputs!" user
> exception.
> 
> Why is the output editable up to state running?

To be able to modify it.

[udono, 2012-04-13 16:33:06]

On 2012/04/13 16:19:26, ced wrote:
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/129004/production.py
> File production.py (right):
> 
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/129004/production.py#newcode120
> production.py:120: | ~Eval('location')),
> On 2012/04/13 15:53:11, udono wrote:
> > I checked this states with a production based on product and BOM. I changed
> the
> > quantity of the output when the production is in state 'running'. When I try
> to
> > set the state to done, I get the "It misses some cost on the outputs!" user
> > exception.
> > Why is the output editable up to state running?
> To be able to modify it.

Is it intentional to not re-calculate the cost when changing the output quantity
only?

N.B. When I additionally change the price of the output to have the same price x
quantity then before, I can pass to state 'done'.

[ced, 2012-04-13 16:47:36]

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py
File production.py (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py#newcode139
production.py:139: 'missing_cost': 'It misses some cost on the outputs!',
On 2012/04/13 14:39:17, udono wrote:
> On 2012/04/13 09:12:16, ced wrote:
> > On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> > > This user error is always raised, when encoding a production without using
> > > product and BOM only made of inputs and outputs.
> > > With this setup the cost is always 0.00.
> > I explained it on the mailing list where nobody answers.
> I read the description, but I can not get production working without product
and
> BOM.
> 
> My scenario is:
> 
>     * Install production patch and dependencies:
>       company, country, currency, party, product, production, stock
>       (N.B. No accounting modules!)
>     * Create a new production
>     * Fill required fields, but not Product and BOM
>     * Input Product: qty 1 price 100
>     * Output Product: qty 1 price 100
>     * Check cost doesn't change
>     * Save production: It misses some cost on the outputs!

The cost is not based on the input price but on the input cost price.

[udono, 2012-04-18 18:15:36]

On 2012/04/13 16:47:36, ced wrote:
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py
> File production.py (right):
> 
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4306055/diff/119006/production.py#newcode139
> production.py:139: 'missing_cost': 'It misses some cost on the outputs!',
> On 2012/04/13 14:39:17, udono wrote:
> > On 2012/04/13 09:12:16, ced wrote:
> > > On 2012/04/13 08:29:33, udono wrote:
> > > > This user error is always raised, when encoding a production without
using
> > > > product and BOM only made of inputs and outputs.
> > > > With this setup the cost is always 0.00.
> > > I explained it on the mailing list where nobody answers.
> > I read the description, but I can not get production working without product
> and
> > BOM.
> > 
> > My scenario is:
> > 
> >     * Install production patch and dependencies:
> >       company, country, currency, party, product, production, stock
> >       (N.B. No accounting modules!)
> >     * Create a new production
> >     * Fill required fields, but not Product and BOM
> >     * Input Product: qty 1 price 100
> >     * Output Product: qty 1 price 100
> >     * Check cost doesn't change
> >     * Save production: It misses some cost on the outputs!
> The cost is not based on the input price but on the input cost price.

Ok, I checked this. Another more complete example:
     * Install production patch and dependencies:
       company, country, currency, party, product, production, stock
       (N.B. No accounting modules!)
     * Create a new production
     * Fill required fields, but not Product and BOM
     * Input Move: qty 1 Product in: cost price 100.00, list price 150.00
     * Output Move: qty 1 Product out: cost price 160.00, list price 200.00
     * Check Production Cost: 5.00 (wrong!?)
     * Workflow: Wait, assign, force assign, run
     * When hitting done: It misses some cost on the outputs!
     * Trying to go back in the workflow from state wait to draft:
       You can not set state to draft!

[udono, 2012-04-20 14:28:07]

I better clarify the scenario and point to the problems.

This steps works as expected with Patch Set 19:
On 2012/04/18 18:15:36, udono wrote:
>      * Install production patch and dependencies:
>        company, country, currency, party, product, production, stock
>        (N.B. No accounting modules!)
>      * Create a new production
>      * Fill required fields, but not Product and BOM
>      * Input Move: qty 1 Product in: cost price 100.00, list price 150.00
>      * Output Move: qty 1 Product out: cost price 160.00, list price 200.00

The first problem calculation of production cost seems wrong:
>      * Check Production Cost: 5.00 (wrong!?)

Next problem with the workflow and the check on state change from run to done:
>      * Workflow: Wait, assign, force assign, run
>      * When hitting done: It misses some cost on the outputs!

Next problem with the workflow and the change back from wait to draft:
>      * Trying to go back in the workflow from state wait to draft:
>        You can not set state to draft!

[ced, 2012-04-27 17:56:26]

On 20/04/12 14:28 +0000, udo.spallek@googlemail.com wrote:
> I better clarify the scenario and point to the problems.
> 
> This steps works as expected with Patch Set 19:
> On 2012/04/18 18:15:36, udono wrote:
> >      * Install production patch and dependencies:
> >        company, country, currency, party, product, production, stock
> >        (N.B. No accounting modules!)
> >      * Create a new production
> >      * Fill required fields, but not Product and BOM
> >      * Input Move: qty 1 Product in: cost price 100.00, list price
> 150.00
> >      * Output Move: qty 1 Product out: cost price 160.00, list price
> 200.00
> 
> The first problem calculation of production cost seems wrong:
> >      * Check Production Cost: 5.00 (wrong!?)

I can not reproduce it.
Perhaps you have cost_price set on the stock move?
Otherwise send me your database.

> Next problem with the workflow and the check on state change from run to
> done:
> >      * Workflow: Wait, assign, force assign, run
> >      * When hitting done: It misses some cost on the outputs!

Have you set the unit price of the outgoing move correctly?
It must match the cost.

> Next problem with the workflow and the change back from wait to draft:
> >      * Trying to go back in the workflow from state wait to draft:
> >        You can not set state to draft!

You can not go to draft, once you have at least a move done.
I can not hide the button because we lack of PYSON to do it.

-- 
Cédric Krier

B2CK SPRL
Rue de Rotterdam, 4
4000 Liège
Belgium
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Email/Jabber: cedric.krier@b2ck.com
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

[udono, 2012-04-30 15:49:12]

LGTM
On 2012/04/27 17:56:26, ced wrote:
> On 20/04/12 14:28 +0000, mailto:udo.spallek@googlemail.com wrote:
> > The first problem calculation of production cost seems wrong:
> > >      * Check Production Cost: 5.00 (wrong!?)
> I can not reproduce it.
I tested again today on tip. With a new production it works as expected.

> > Next problem with the workflow and the check on state change from run to
> > done:
> > >      * Workflow: Wait, assign, force assign, run
> > >      * When hitting done: It misses some cost on the outputs!
> Have you set the unit price of the outgoing move correctly?
> It must match the cost.
Yes, this works. So why not make it a function field and fill it with the
cost / qty?

> > Next problem with the workflow and the change back from wait to draft:
> > >      * Trying to go back in the workflow from state wait to draft:
> > >        You can not set state to draft!
> You can not go to draft, once you have at least a move done.
> I can not hide the button because we lack of PYSON to do it.
Ok, understand.

[ced, 2012-04-30 16:02:02]

On 30/04/12 15:49 +0000, udo.spallek@googlemail.com wrote:
> >> >      * Workflow: Wait, assign, force assign, run
> >> >      * When hitting done: It misses some cost on the outputs!
> >Have you set the unit price of the outgoing move correctly?
> >It must match the cost.
> Yes, this works. So why not make it a function field and fill it with
> the
> cost / qty?

It can not be a function field because it is a choice to be made by
users.
By default, if you use a BOM than we know what is the target product and
the unit price is filled with the cost price.

-- 
Cédric Krier

B2CK SPRL
Rue de Rotterdam, 4
4000 Liège
Belgium
Tel: +32 472 54 46 59
Email/Jabber: cedric.krier@b2ck.com
Website: http://www.b2ck.com/

[udono, 2012-04-30 16:41:38]

On 2012/04/30 16:02:02, ced wrote:
> On 30/04/12 15:49 +0000, mailto:udo.spallek@googlemail.com wrote:
> > >> >      * Workflow: Wait, assign, force assign, run
> > >> >      * When hitting done: It misses some cost on the outputs!
> > >Have you set the unit price of the outgoing move correctly?
> > >It must match the cost.
> > Yes, this works. So why not make it a function field and fill it with
> > the
> > cost / qty?
> It can not be a function field because it is a choice to be made by
> users.
> By default, if you use a BOM than we know what is the target product and
> the unit price is filled with the cost price.
Thanks for clarification, now I understand. In the on-the-fly setup of the
production (without BOM) we can have more than one Output Line. So we can not
know the unit price for each line.