| *** a42niem has joined #idempiere | 05:06 | |
| *** nmicoud has joined #idempiere | 05:58 | |
| *** mbozem has joined #idempiere | 08:17 | |
| *** hesham_ has joined #idempiere | 08:49 | |
| *** hesham_ has quit IRC | 08:50 | |
| *** idempiere has joined #idempiere | 09:21 | |
| *** hesham_ has joined #idempiere | 09:45 | |
| *** hesham_ has quit IRC | 10:23 | |
| *** hesham_ has joined #idempiere | 10:23 | |
| *** hesham_ has quit IRC | 10:28 | |
| *** nmicoud_ has joined #idempiere | 11:55 | |
| *** nmicoud has quit IRC | 11:58 | |
| *** nmicoud__ has joined #idempiere | 13:20 | |
| *** nmicoud_ has quit IRC | 13:23 | |
| *** mbozem has quit IRC | 15:12 | |
| *** nmicoud__ has quit IRC | 15:23 | |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] deepak updated IDEMPIERE-3413 | 15:24 |
|---|---|---|
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] [~carlosruiz_globalqss], Thanks for sharing this. I think this is what we are trying to achieve. Only what I think require core changes are 1. support of multi selection field in find window. I think it should support =, != and contains operator. 2. Also adding support in evaluator to allow readOnly and displayLogic can handle multi selection. | 15:24 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3413 | 15:24 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] deepak updated IDEMPIERE-3413 | 15:26 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] I would like to here what should be good operator for CONTAINS in readOnly logic? When we are adding support for multi selection, If readOnly or Display logic need to check is particular value is selected, we can use CONTAINS operator. | 15:27 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3413 | 15:27 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] hieplq updated IDEMPIERE-3413 | 16:10 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] maybe: = mean contain exact selection, example: current value of org is HQ1 and HQ2 then compare value is (HQ1, HQ2) IN mean partial match, example: current value of org is HQ1 and HQ2 it will IN if compare value have (HQ1, HQ2, HQn) CONTAIN mean contain :) , example: current value of org is HQ1 and HQ2 and HQ3 it will contain if compare value have (HQ1, HQ2) or (HQ1, HQ3) how about order of option? it's | 16:10 |
| Not-ccb0 | importance or not? | 16:10 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3413 | 16:10 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-3413 | 17:00 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] = sounds like ALL IN sounds like ANY order of options doesn't sound important unless the user can reorder the list Another technical challenge for this kind of field is the management of foreign key. It cannot have foreign key defined - so the PO.delete maybe needs to review all of these foreign keys and refresh them - or forbid deletion. NOTE: I think we have a missing piece there also for the foreign | 17:00 |
| Not-ccb0 | key management of all Record_ID references. | 17:00 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3413 | 17:00 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] deepak updated IDEMPIERE-3413 | 17:42 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] Foreign key in postgresql array related patch is submitted by some one but yet not included in any release. We give thought on same and consider that we will not worry about foreign key currently. We will allow to delete record even it is referenced by multi selection. we will take care in editor to ignore missing entries. | 17:43 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3413 | 17:43 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] hieplq created IDEMPIERE-3445 integrate code editor for script | 18:06 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3445 | 18:06 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] alex.albuquerque created IDEMPIERE-3446 Define the workflow approver dynamically | 20:32 |
| Not-ccb0 | [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-3446 | 20:32 |
| *** a42niem has quit IRC | 21:17 | |
| *** CarlosRuiz has joined #idempiere | 23:58 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!