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] [MIG] base_ical: migration to 16.0 #297

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: 16.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

hbrunn
Copy link
Member

@hbrunn hbrunn commented Jul 15, 2024

/ocabot migration base_ical

</tree>
</field>

<label for="api_key_ids" string="Existing Access" />
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@fkantelberg you left a note here to reevaluate this for v16 - what did you have in mind? I find it helpful to have the field here too, so that users don't have to manage their calendar urls via the api keys tab.

We might consider adding a field that actually filters for the scope though, as the domain on the view doesn't do that

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

In 15.0 there was a groups="base.group_no_one" which limits the visbility more than in 16.0 where this was removed. (developer api keys => api keys) This is the reason I added the following code in 15.0. In 16.0 you already see the api keys properly. Adding a new field would show them on 2 spots which might also confuse people.

I would remove it and just go with the standard here. The name of the API key should be feasable.

@neoneddy
Copy link

Anything we can do to get this pulled in officially?

@jcdrubay
Copy link

Anything we can do to get this pulled in officially?

Hi @neoneddy
You could help by doing a [1] code review
Or doing [2] functional test on runboat (as soon as the build is complete). Normally, the build should have complete for a long time, so maybe a Maintainers needs to re-trigger the build.
Or [3] ensure that the README reflects well what the module is doing (you can add your comments in the tab Files Changed of this PR)

Once you have done one of the three tasks, then you can add submit a code review from the tab Files Changed, and then on the top right you can use the button "Review Changes" to comment or approve.

SiesslPhillip pushed a commit to grueneerde/OCA-server-backend that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2024
Copy link

There hasn't been any activity on this pull request in the past 4 months, so it has been marked as stale and it will be closed automatically if no further activity occurs in the next 30 days.
If you want this PR to never become stale, please ask a PSC member to apply the "no stale" label.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically. label Jan 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
stale PR/Issue without recent activity, it'll be soon closed automatically.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants