fix: prepare spp_cel_vocabulary for stable release#106
fix: prepare spp_cel_vocabulary for stable release#106gonzalesedwin1123 wants to merge 15 commits into19.0from
Conversation
display_name is a computed field in Odoo and gets silently ignored during create(). The correct field on spp.vocabulary.concept.group is label. Also migrate old-style tuple to Command API.
Fix r.gender → r.gender_id and m._link.kind → m.relationship_type in all function docstrings. Add comment explaining why sudo() is needed in head() function.
Add actionable guidance to warning messages (menu paths, field name hints). Fix r.gender → r.gender_id in docstring examples.
Standardize on r prefix, fix gender → gender_id, add vocabulary_cache.py and all test files to structure diagram, update test command, fix XML example to use label and search-by-name pattern, add head() to helpers.
Replace display_name → label in concept group create() calls (17 occurrences). display_name is a computed field that gets silently ignored; label is the correct field. Also migrate old-style tuples (4, id) and (6, 0, [ids]) to Command.link() and Command.set().
Standardize on r prefix (49 me. → r.), fix field names to use _id suffix (gender_id, not gender), replace m._link.kind with head(m), add head() to Quick Reference, add "When to Use Which" guide, add disclaimers for country-module fields and external functions.
Fix menu path to Settings > Vocabularies > Concept Groups, note that groups are created by hook (no XML IDs), fix display_name → label in XML examples, fix Python example to use Command API, add note about cel_function being metadata only.
Concise quick reference with function table, basic examples, and when-to-use-which guide for inclusion in README.rst.
The readme/USAGE.md will contain a UI testing guide for QA. Current developer quick reference content is already in root USAGE.md.
- H-1: replace phantom relationship_type with relationship_type_id, add notes that is_head() requires deployment-defined code field - H-2: replace old-style tuple in concept_groups.xml comment with Python search-and-write pattern - M-2: clarify "Display name" → "Label (display value)" in README.md - L-1: standardize && to and in DESCRIPTION.md and docstrings - L-2: standardize menu path separator → to > in data/README.md
10 test scenarios covering: concept group verification, adding codes, idempotent installation, CEL expression validation, domain translation, empty/nonexistent group behavior, local codes, security, and search.
Summary of ChangesHello, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly enhances the Highlights
Changelog
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 19.0 #106 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 71.17% 69.96% -1.21%
==========================================
Files 704 738 +34
Lines 38554 44024 +5470
==========================================
+ Hits 27439 30802 +3363
- Misses 11115 13222 +2107
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request is a significant step towards a stable release of spp_cel_vocabulary. It successfully addresses several key areas: fixing a bug in test data creation by replacing display_name with label, migrating all test and data files to the Odoo 19 Command API, and standardizing documentation across the board. The documentation has been greatly improved with consistent field naming (_id suffixes, r prefix), clearer explanations, and the addition of a comprehensive UI testing guide. The improved error messages in the translator will also be very helpful for developers. My only suggestion for improvement is to address the content duplication between the new UI testing guide in README.rst and readme/USAGE.md to enhance long-term maintainability.
| Usage | ||
| ===== | ||
|
|
||
| UI Testing Guide | ||
| ---------------- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The new 'UI Testing Guide' section seems to duplicate the content from the newly added spp_cel_vocabulary/readme/USAGE.md file. While the formatting is different (RST vs Markdown), maintaining the same content in two places can lead to inconsistencies in the future. To improve maintainability, consider generating one file from the other as part of your documentation build process, or using a tool that allows including Markdown in RST files if your documentation toolchain supports it.
1 participant
Summary
Prepares
spp_cel_vocabularyfor Production/Stable status after staff engineer and UX expertreviews identified bugs, documentation inconsistencies, and Odoo 19 compliance gaps.
display_name→labelbug in test concept group creation (field was silently ignored)rprefix and_idfield suffixes across all docs/docstringsrelationship_typefield references (replaced withrelationship_type_id+ notes)Bug Fixes
_create_test_concept_grouphelper inspp_cel_domain/tests/common.pyuseddisplay_name(a computed field silently ignored by Odoo) instead of
label— fixed at root causedisplay_namereplaced withlabelacross all 4 test filesrelationship_typereferenced in 8 doc/docstring locations does not exist as a field —replaced with
relationship_type_idand added notes thatis_head()requires adeployment-defined code field
Odoo 19 Compliance
(4, id)→Command.link(id)and 3(6, 0, [ids])→Command.set([ids])Documentation
rprefix (wasme.in 66 locations)_idsuffix (53 occurrences across docs + docstrings)head()to quick reference tables withis_head()vshead()distinctionsudo()justification comment inhead()functionexpression validation, security, local codes, empty/missing groups)
Files Changed (16 files, +1240/-225)
spp_cel_domain/tests/common.pydisplay_name→label, Command APIspp_cel_vocabulary/__manifest__.pyspp_cel_vocabulary/models/cel_vocabulary_translator.pyspp_cel_vocabulary/services/cel_vocabulary_functions.pyspp_cel_vocabulary/tests/test_*.py(4 files)display_name→label, Command APIspp_cel_vocabulary/README.mdspp_cel_vocabulary/USAGE.mdspp_cel_vocabulary/data/README.mdspp_cel_vocabulary/data/concept_groups.xmlspp_cel_vocabulary/readme/DESCRIPTION.mdspp_cel_vocabulary/readme/USAGE.mdspp_cel_vocabulary/README.rst+index.htmlTest plan
spp_cel_vocabulary: 117/117 tests passspp_cel_domain: 569/569 tests pass (cross-module helper change)readme/USAGE.md(10 test scenarios)development_statusto"Production/Stable"