[17.0][MIG] hr_holidays_natural_period: Migration to version 17.0 #141
Conversation
…ve types [UPD] Update hr_holidays_natural_period.pot [UPD] README.rst
…ployee is not set yet hr_holidays_natural_period 13.0.1.0.1
… employee set yet hr_holidays_natural_period 13.0.1.0.2
…ion. Previously, the _exist_interval_in_date () function always returned False, which always created a new interval. Although this was totally incorrect, it was detected in a real use case when there were working days and holidays in the date range causing incorrect overtime. TT33779 hr_holidays_natural_period 13.0.1.0.3
TT37026 [UPD] Update hr_holidays_natural_period.pot [UPD] README.rst
Currently translated at 100.0% (6 of 6 strings) Translation: hr-holidays-16.0/hr-holidays-16.0-hr_holidays_natural_period Translate-URL: https://translation.odoo-community.org/projects/hr-holidays-16-0/hr-holidays-16-0-hr_holidays_natural_period/es/
…reation It is necessary to recalculate the duration value in the create() method when it is done by UX. Fixes OCA#105
|
/ocabot migration hr_holidays_natural_period |
carlos-lopez-tecnativa
force-pushed
the
17.0-mig-hr_holidays_natural_period
branch
from
16cc80f to
8424b0a
Compare
carlos-lopez-tecnativa
force-pushed
the
17.0-mig-hr_holidays_natural_period
branch
from
8424b0a to
df9187e
Compare
|
The test failed after this PR odoo/odoo#153044. |
I'm sorry but I don't see any relation, can you rebase to check the error that occurs (in any case it will have to be solved). |
Because Odoo removed the field |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code and functional review OK.
I don't understand the error in the tests indicated #141 (comment) (I don't see any error, PR and locally).
|
On my way to merge this fine PR! |
|
Congratulations, your PR was merged at 6e46127. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️ |
@Tecnativa TT50070
@pedrobaeza @victoralmau @peluko00 could you please take a look?