IDempiere/FullMeeting20130717 - Revision history

CarlosRuiz: remove JIRA notifications

2013-07-17T18:45:20Z

remove JIRA notifications

CarlosRuiz: Created page with ' ⇐ Table of Contents | Full Meeting Minutes | Full Meeting 2013-07-17 '''''hengsi...'

2013-07-17T18:44:23Z

Created page with ' ⇐ Table of Contents | Full Meeting Minutes | Full Meeting 2013-07-17 '''''hengsi...'

New page

⇐
[[IDempiere|Table of Contents]] |
[[IDempiere/Full Meeting Minutes|Full Meeting Minutes]] |
Full Meeting 2013-07-17


'''''hengsin''''': hi Carlos 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': Hi hengsin 
'''''hengsin''''': got a question for inventory costing. the costing level is define by accounting schema. if you have multiple accounting schema and have different costing level for the primary and secondary schema, do you know whether that will work ? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': checking ... 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': Hi everybody 
'''''nmicoud''''': Bonjour ! 
'''''hengsin''''': hi micoud 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': hengsin, in cost table there is one record per each acctschema - so it must not be an issue 
'''''mhernandezve''''': Hi all! 
'''''hengsin''''': but you can have conflicting transaction requirement for costing level. for e.g, primary is client and secondary is batch_lot. 
'''''hengsin''''': hi hernandez 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': yep - still don't get the issue 
'''''hengsin''''': Carlos, I means shouldn't the system disallow such combination ? I means you can't just maintain lot for the secondary schema while the focus should really on the primary 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': seems like there's something wrong with "Product Costs" window - on demo I can't see the "Cost Details" tab 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': it would be just that the cost records for second schema are based on lot - and posted via lot 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': you mean a possible functional accounting issue because the cost values on both schemas can have different amounts? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': maybe functionally that can be an issue as your two accountings don't match in inventory valuation 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': maybe it could be a valid use case - but it will add an extra layer of confusion for the accountants 
'''''hengsin''''': I means transaction wise, you need to do it by lot. if your by lot costing level is at the secondary schema, I don't think the system will validate that 
'''''hengsin''''': anyway, that's just a wild combination that should be rare, just a question of whether the system should allow such level of flexibility. 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': at this moment I think the system is not validating lot even for first acctschema 
'''''xolali''''': Hello everyone 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': so, users could do messy things like defining lot cost for a product when the product doesn't have attribute set (which doesn't make sense) 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': Hi Anthony 
'''''xolali''''': Deepak any news on chart editor feature from adaxa 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': hengsin, about IDEMPIERE-1168 - do you think as a fix we must not load context of detail tab - just keep in context the master tab? 
'''''hengsin''''': wow, it is even more loose than I've think of. 
'''''hengsin''''': I've not look at that issue, it will be good if we can work with tab context variable instead of master 
'''''hengsin''''': hmm .. for details tab, perhaps just populate by tab only 
'''''hengsin''''': sorry, I means with tab context variable instead of window context variable. 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': hmm - it's going to be weird if you do changes on master and detail at the same time 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': at this moment there is something bad with tab context variables 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': at this moment is dependent on the number of the tab, i.e. @1|Processed@ is the processed field on tab #1 (first tab is 0) 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': suppose seqno 10 and 20 for master and detail 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': if an extension introduces seqno 15 - then the tab context @1|Processed@ is broken 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': it will become @2|Processed@ but the logic will be pointing to the introduced tab 
'''''hengsin''''': for the current UI, detail is visible and editable together with the master tab. I don't think it can work if you totally exclude it from the context 
'''''hengsin''''': perhaps, we can introduce a special notation, for e.g @||Processed@ to means current tab ? 
'''''hengsin''''': or @~|Processed@ 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': also for Processed context variable is in code - not in *logic 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': and some windows trust in the window "Processed" context 
'''''hengsin''''': yes, that's why I proposed above - only load details tab's value into the "tab context" 
'''''hengsin''''': and if we introduce the @~|Processed@ notation, it solve the change tabno issue too 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': ah - you mean - global context have the master tab - and detail will be on context as tab variables 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': that sounds ok 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': right - will open a ticket also for the @~|Processed@ notation for current tab 
'''''Deepak''''': Anthony, Sorry I was away. 
'''''Deepak''''': patch is in review queue for Carlos 
'''''Deepak''''': So Chart from Adaxa will in iDempiere once Carlos or Low finish his review 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': is code attached on JIRA? Anthony could help with review too 
'''''xolali''''': ok Deepak thanks. yes i really want to help with the review. am looking at using a different chart library from jfreechart 
'''''xolali''''': an html5 js chart library 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-883 status set to "Reopened" -assignee set to "None" -resolution set to "None" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] I see now how this is happening, when you create a payment the sales trx flag is shown correctly, but when you open an already created payment then the info invoice window doesn't assign the flag for payments (same in payment allocation tab) 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-883 
'''''Deepak''''': Anthony, Will upload patch on ticket too. So you can check 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-883 Attachment set to "bonfire-screenshot-20130717-090108-203.png" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-883 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] hengsin updated IDEMPIERE-883 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] Carlos, that's a different issue and it doesn't align with the title and description of this ticket. Better open a new one to avoid any confusion. 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-883 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] deepak updated IDEMPIERE-1157 Attachment set to "1002851 - one.zip" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] Attached are the patches containing changes to add chart functionality. 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1157 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': hengsin, about IDEMPIERE-883 description mentions that sales flag is not set - but title mention business partner - maybe we change the title to reflect better? 
'''''hengsin''''': no, originally, there is a bug for business partner which have been fixed 
'''''hengsin''''': see the commit history 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': got it - will open a new ticket then 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-883 Attachment set to "None" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-883 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss created IDEMPIERE-1183 Info Invoice window not setting Sales Trx flag 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1183 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-883 status set to "Resolved" -assignee set to "Heng Sin Low" -resolution set to "Fixed" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] Sales flag issue moved to IDEMPIERE-1183 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-883 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-1183 Attachment set to "bonfire-screenshot-20130717-090108-203.png" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1183 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-1183 labels set to "Usability" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1183 
'''''Deepak''''': Anthony, please note that IDEMPIERE-1157 has patch in attachment 
'''''xolali''''': yes, just downloaded and checking it out 
'''''xolali''''': thank you Deepak 
'''''hengsin''''': Deepak, is the using id from the original Adaxa migration script or it is using new id generated from idempiere centralized id server ? 
'''''hengsin''''': typo - "is the using" = "is that using" 
'''''Deepak''''': Original from adaxa 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': is in the range of 50K (adempiere) 
'''''Deepak''''': There was one 2pack committed by adaxa which we convert in migration script. So script to add series column uses iDempiere ID 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': the changes to AD_Field_V and AD_Field_VT must be on migration script too 
'''''Deepak''''': ohk, Will add that today 
'''''Deepak''''': Can we update original migration script? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': I see also all new classes don't have GPL Header - maybe better we ask Steven if he allows us to add them crediting Adaxa properly 
'''''Deepak''''': I will check with Steven 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': thanks Deepak - will add those comments on ticket and some others too 
'''''Deepak''''': Sure 
'''''Deepak''''': I am working on changing FIFO based DateMaterialPolicy and want to check can I go with assumption that projectIssue line have always ASI? 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlos.augusto updated IDEMPIERE-984 Attachment set to "Idempiere984V2.patch" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-984 
'''''nmicoud''''': What do you think of the solution proposed on https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1171 ? 
'''''hengsin''''': Deepak, it is important that all new classes must have the proper gplv2 license header. 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlos.augusto updated IDEMPIERE-984 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] Carlos, I've already done the changes that are requiered. Regards, Carlos Augusto 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-984 
'''''hengsin''''': Deepak, how do you comes to that assumption ? 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': hi guys.. is there anybody have an idea of https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1170 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-1157 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] Thanks Deepak, some light peer review (not thorough, not tested): - the changes to AD_Field_V and AD_Field_VT must be on migration script too - new classes don't have GPL Header - maybe better we ask Adaxa to add GPL Header crediting them properly as contributor - adding a new field type we need to check the impact on: * DefaultLookupFactory.isLookup * DisplayType.isID * DisplayType.getDescription * MColumn.getReferenceTableName Saw two co 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1157 
'''''Deepak414''''': Low, as we normally need to track asset assigned to project. If any consumable us assign then that can be done using charge 
'''''hengsin''''': Deepak, I don't think you can make that sort of assumption if it is not enforce in the UI. 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': nmicoud, about 1171 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': do you mean order the buttons on the gear icon? 
'''''nmicoud''''': no 
'''''nmicoud''''': button added through actions 
'''''nmicoud''''': IAction 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': ah - to order customized buttons on the toolbar 
'''''Deepak414''''': Low, I looked current code and it never try check for ASI value on line and just create storage entry with that ASI. No logic to get storage for qty in MProjectIssue.process 
'''''nmicoud''''': yes 
'''''Deepak414''''': I am not much familiere with this window and not used ever. So think code may written with that assumption 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': nmicoud, sounds fine and harmless 
'''''nmicoud''''': ok, will do this then 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': maybe enable the field seqno when customization=Y 
'''''nmicoud''''': sure, i'll update ticket 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] nmicoud updated IDEMPIERE-1171 description set to "Hi, I've added a second button on a window using AD_ToolBarButton table. I've seen that the SeqNo column was created, but not showed and never used in code. What i propose : 1 - show field on window (enable the field seqno when customization=Y) 2 - use the SeqNo for orderBy clause in MToolBarButton.getOfWindow(int, String) WDYT ? Regards, Nicolas" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1171 
'''''nmicoud''''': btw, any update on ticket 959 ? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': ah - sorry Nicolas - what I understood is that 959 is that there are other easier ways to achieve the same without impacting the code so much 
'''''nmicoud''''': i've update a 'lighter' patch last week, with less impact 
'''''nmicoud''''': is it possible to achieve without less modification ? 
'''''hengsin''''': Deepak, any assumption must be consistent with the UI 
'''''hengsin''''': otherwise, your code can get "surprise" at runtime 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': nmicoud, not sure if we understood 100% your use case - but the conclusion we arrived is that you can do it without changes 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': your use case is a process/report extension - right? 
'''''nmicoud''''': no 
'''''nmicoud''''': i want to be able to get the UUID of tab, window, process, ... from every core classes 
'''''nmicoud''''': not "every", but main like GridTab... 
'''''nmicoud''''': Actually, i can only test AD_Tab_ID ; i would like to test AD_Tab_UU 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': you mentioned a customization of trees on the original message - but I still don't get the need :-( 
'''''Deepak414''''': I think I may need to do some study on project issue usage. 
'''''nmicoud''''': i'm customizing a window which will have some trees. It needs to customize GridTab, MTree, ... And i need to identify the current tab to show correct datas in my trees 
'''''nmicoud''''': I would like to get the UU as it will always be the same (thanks to 2Pack) instead of ID (i won't use centralized ID) 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': _TabInfo_AD_Tab_UU context variable? 
'''''nmicoud''''': i need it in code ? Are context variable available in code ? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': yep - if the code is related to a window 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': if you have the windowNo (which usually you have) you can get the context of that window 
'''''nmicoud''''': with something like : string uuid = Env.getContext (Env.getCtx(), getWindowNo(), _TabInfo_AD_Tab_UU); ? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': no, like this 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': string uuid = Env.getContext(Env.getCtx(), WindowNo, TabNo, "_TabInfo_AD_Tab_UU"); 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': as tab_uu is a tab context variable you also need the tabno 
'''''nmicoud''''': that's better :) 
'''''nmicoud''''': ok, then i will test this 
'''''nmicoud''''': thanks 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': Edwin_Ang, checking 1170 
'''''Edwin_Ang_''''': CarlosRuiz: thanks.. any hint about it? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': ah - after inserting the nodes are not draggable 
'''''Edwin_Ang_''''': yes.. it is causing issue for me cos i also use a tree on my project window 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': you said it worked on 1.0b 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': trying to find changes to tree ... and checking the behavior without that change 
'''''nmicoud''''': Seems to be related to itemDraggable (from SimpleTreeModel) ? 
'''''Edwin_Ang_''''': yes.. cos i reverted to 1.0b and tested it 
'''''Edwin_Ang_''''': it's working 
'''''Edwin_Ang_''''': just checking the changeset 
'''''Edwin_Ang_''''': probably related to IDEMPIERE-1060? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': I'm trying to test reverting that changeset 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': yes Edwin_Ang_ 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': reverting that changeset works 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': Edwin_Ang, reverting that changeset works - so now will try to find the line with the problem 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': ah.. thx Carlos 
'''''xolali''''': Carlos, were u able to aply the patch from Deepak, am getting a abort:bad hunk #1 error 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': ah - I applied it into release1 branch from trekglobal repo - is a little ahead as there is where hengsin and I are making peer review before integrating to idempiere 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': I mean this one https://bitbucket.org/trekglobal/idempiere 
'''''xolali''''': ok, will check it from there 
'''''nmicoud''''': do you know when you'll be able to integrate things from the peer review queue ? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': I am - slower than before, but I am :-) 
'''''nmicoud''''': :)) 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': slower because I'm more focused on testing nowadays 
'''''nmicoud''''': stabilize and then integrating new stuffs (and bugs ;)) 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': :-) 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': well.. it is one package right.. feature and bugs 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': :D 
'''''nmicoud''''': lol 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': btw.. nicolas.. do you have any idea to set the itemdraggable value dynamically? 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': in my case 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': my window is has two tabs 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': first one is project 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': second one is project activity 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': i want to set the itemdraggable value to false when the project status changed to some value 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': any ideas? 
'''''nmicoud''''': yes 
'''''nmicoud''''': in ADTabpanel, on dataStatusChanged, you can see if you value ahs changed and then try to change the itemdraggable to false or true 
'''''nmicoud''''': SimpleTreeModel model = (SimpleTreeModel)(TreeModel<?>) treePanel.getTree().getModel(); 
'''''nmicoud''''': model.setItemDraggable(true/false); 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': however i want to use value on the parent tab to control the tree 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': project status is on project tab 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': while my tree is on project activity 
'''''nmicoud''''': means that child tab can be draggable or not ; depending in master value ? 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': ok - the guilty is the if added on ADTreePanel.initTree 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': yes 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': i have several project status 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': when the status is Initiating / Planning, user will be able to change the tree freely 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': is the status is Executing / Monitoring / Closed, the tree cannot be dragged anymore 
'''''nmicoud''''': so, perhaps, you can do something like this in dataStatusChanged or perhaps in activate 
'''''hengsin''''': Carlos, removing that will caused different problem though 
'''''nmicoud''''': gridTab.getParentTab().getRecord_ID() => and then look for the status, and then update itemdragable value 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': just want to make sure.. are all fields in a tab recorded as context variable? 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': i am thinking of adding in SimpleTreeModel initADTree 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': hengsin, analyzing - the treemodel changed after new record and the new treemodel is not draggable - finding the cause 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': yes, all fields are context 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': can i do something like this? 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': String status = Env.getContext(Env.getCtx(), windowNo, "ProjectStatus"); 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': if (vTree.getTreeType().equals(MTree.TREETYPE_ProjectActivity) && (status.equals("IN") || status.equals("PL"))) 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': { treeModel.setItemDraggable(true); } 
'''''hengsin''''': carlos, the test is correct if it is update so I guess that's where it need to be improved upon. 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': seems like is ADTabpanel.dataStatusChanged 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': hengsin, ADTabpanel.dataStatusChanged line 1220 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': is creating a new model repeatedly - on each data status change - for example on new - or updating the first field 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': and this created model is not set draggable and listening dropevent as in initADTree 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': that code was added for IDEMPIERE-950 - maybe we need to change it to call initADTree - let me check 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': yes - got the patch 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': Edwin_Ang, patch is here if you want to test -> http://bitbucket.org/trekglobal/idempiere/commits/1bce93d 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': will move into iDempiere after hengsin's approval too 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': ok thanks 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': will test it 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-1170 assignee set to "Carlos Antonio Ruiz Gomez" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1170 
'''''nmicoud''''': gtg ; bye bye 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] richardmh updated IDEMPIERE-1138 assignee set to "Richard Morales Herrera" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1138 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': gtg now 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': carlos thx for the patch 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': it is working 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': will do more test to confirm 
'''''CarlosRuiz''''': excellent - thanks 
'''''Edwin_Ang''''': bye 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] carlosruiz_globalqss updated IDEMPIERE-1177 priority set to "Trivial" 
'''''Not-002''''': [IDEMPIERE] http://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1177

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 '''''xolali''''': ok Deepak thanks. yes i really want to help with the review. am looking at using a different chart library from jfreechart<br>
 '''''xolali''''': an html5 js chart library<br>
 '''''Deepak''''': Anthony, Will upload patch on ticket too. So you can check<br>
 '''''CarlosRuiz''''': hengsin, about IDEMPIERE-883 description mentions that sales flag is not set - but title mention business partner - maybe we change the title to reflect better?<br>
 '''''hengsin''''': no, originally, there is a bug for business partner which have been fixed<br>
 '''''hengsin''''': see the commit history<br>
 '''''CarlosRuiz''''': got it - will open a new ticket then<br>
 '''''Deepak''''': Anthony, please note that IDEMPIERE-1157 has patch in attachment<br>
 '''''xolali''''': yes, just downloaded and checking it out<br>
@@ Line 102: / Line 80: @@
 '''''Deepak''''': Sure<br>
 '''''Deepak''''': I am working on changing FIFO based DateMaterialPolicy and want to check can I go with assumption that projectIssue line have always ASI?<br>
 '''''nmicoud''''': What do you think of the solution proposed on https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1171 ?<br>
 '''''hengsin''''': Deepak, it is important that all new classes must have the proper gplv2 license header.<br>
 '''''hengsin''''': Deepak, how do you comes to that assumption ?<br>
 '''''Edwin_Ang''''': hi guys.. is there anybody have an idea of https://idempiere.atlassian.net/browse/IDEMPIERE-1170<br>
 '''''Deepak414''''': Low, as we normally need to track asset assigned to project. If any consumable us assign then that can be done using charge<br>
 '''''hengsin''''': Deepak, I don't think you can make that sort of assumption if it is not enforce in the UI.<br>
@@ Line 129: / Line 99: @@
 '''''CarlosRuiz''''': maybe enable the field seqno when customization=Y<br>
 '''''nmicoud''''': sure, i'll update ticket<br>
 '''''nmicoud''''': btw, any update on ticket 959 ?<br>
 '''''CarlosRuiz''''': ah - sorry Nicolas - what I understood is that 959 is that there are other easier ways to achieve the same without impacting the code so much<br>
@@ Line 229: / Line 197: @@
 '''''Edwin_Ang''''': ok thanks<br>
 '''''Edwin_Ang''''': will test it<br>
 '''''nmicoud''''': gtg ; bye bye<br>
 '''''Edwin_Ang''''': gtg now<br>
 '''''Edwin_Ang''''': carlos thx for the patch<br>
@@ Line 240: / Line 204: @@
 '''''CarlosRuiz''''': excellent - thanks<br>
 '''''Edwin_Ang''''': bye<br>