Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[16.0][ADD] stock_account_lot_expiration_date #349

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 16.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

adasatorres
Copy link

Good morning, this development adds the expiration date by lot to the invoice report.

@adasatorres adasatorres force-pushed the 16.0-add-stock_account_lot_expiration_date branch from 1fb4943 to 81044da Compare January 16, 2025 10:28
Copy link

@rrebollo rrebollo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review: Great work! The code looks good to me (LGTM). Thank you for your contribution! I've provided a few suggestions for your consideration—feel free to address them as you see fit.

import logging

from odoo import models

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
from odoo.tools.misc import format_date

Comment on lines +19 to +20
lot.expiration_date.strftime(
self.env["res.lang"]._lang_get(lang).date_format

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
lot.expiration_date.strftime(
self.env["res.lang"]._lang_get(lang).date_format
format_date(self.env, lot.expiration_date)

self.assertEqual(len(lot_values), 1)
self.assertEqual(
lot_values[0]["expiration_date"],
date(2025, 1, 31).strftime(self.lang.date_format),

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think here You can use the misc format_date function too

Copy link

@lauradiaz22 lauradiaz22 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Functional review: LGTM👍

@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

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). 🤖

1 similar comment
@OCA-git-bot
Copy link
Contributor

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). 🤖

Copy link

@jorgeglez1990 jorgeglez1990 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Functional review: LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants