[14.0][IMP] stock_restrict_lot: validate lot moved is correct

[aleuffre]

Adds a check on picking's validation that the lot indicated in the move line is actually the one in the restriction.

TODO:

• Tests

[OCA-git-bot]

Hi @florian-dacosta,
some modules you are maintaining are being modified, check this out!

[francesco-ooops]

@florian-dacosta should be ready for review now

[geomer198]

Please fix the code by my comments.

[aleuffre]

Please fix the code by my comments.

Thank you for your review @geomer198 , I've addressed all your comments

[geomer198]

LGTM!

[OCA-git-bot]

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

[francesco-ooops]

@florian-dacosta looks good to you? :)

[florian-dacosta]

LGTM
But which is the case where we could an inconsistency between the lot of the stock.move.line and the stock.move?

Is it manual mistak choosing the wrong lot in the UI? In that case, I guess it could also be solved by adding a domain on the stock.move.line lot_id depending on the restrict_lot_id of the stock.move.

Another possibility, to block the user before the validation, would be to replace the action_done override by an api.constrains method to check the lot.

Anyway, ok for me the way it is.

[aleuffre]

LGTM But which is the case where we could an inconsistency between the lot of the stock.move.line and the stock.move?

Is it manual mistak choosing the wrong lot in the UI? In that case, I guess it could also be solved by adding a domain on the stock.move.line lot_id depending on the restrict_lot_id of the stock.move.

Another possibility, to block the user before the validation, would be to replace the action_done override by an api.constrains method to check the lot.

Anyway, ok for me the way it is.

Thanks for the approval!

I didn't want to add a constraint because stock.move and stock.move.line are not written to at the same time, and there could be times just in the normal functioning of the stock module where the fields are not in sync (maybe the move line has been created but the lot has not been selected/reserved yet, etc), so having just a check in ._action_done() seemed safer to me.

[francesco-ooops]

@pedrobaeza go with this?

[francesco-ooops]

or actually also @florian-dacosta can merge :)

[pedrobaeza]

/ocabot merge patch

[OCA-git-bot]

On my way to merge this fine PR!
Prepared branch 14.0-ocabot-merge-pr-1443-by-pedrobaeza-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[OCA-git-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 75be393. Thanks a lot for contributing to OCA. ❤️