[18.0][IMP] base_tier_validation: Make the validation_status field store so that it can be used in searchs

base_tier_validation/README.rst

@@ -1,7 +1,3 @@
-.. image:: https://odoo-community.org/readme-banner-image
-   :target: https://odoo-community.org/get-involved?utm_source=readme
-   :alt: Odoo Community Association
-
 ====================
 Base Tier Validation
 ====================
@@ -17,7 +13,7 @@ Base Tier Validation
 .. |badge1| image:: https://img.shields.io/badge/maturity-Mature-brightgreen.png
     :target: https://odoo-community.org/page/development-status
     :alt: Mature
-.. |badge2| image:: https://img.shields.io/badge/license-AGPL--3-blue.png
+.. |badge2| image:: https://img.shields.io/badge/licence-AGPL--3-blue.png
     :target: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0-standalone.html
     :alt: License: AGPL-3
 .. |badge3| image:: https://img.shields.io/badge/github-OCA%2Fserver--ux-lightgray.png?logo=github
@@ -70,16 +66,16 @@ To configure this module, you need to:
 
 **Note:**
 
-- If check *Notify Reviewers on Creation*, all possible reviewers will
-  be notified by email when this definition is triggered.
-- If check *Notify reviewers on reaching pending* if you want to send a
-  notification when pending status is reached. This is usefull in a
-  approve by sequence scenario to only notify reviewers when it is their
-  turn in the sequence.
-- If check *Comment*, reviewers can comment after click Validate or
-  Reject.
-- If check *Approve by sequence*, reviewers is forced to review by
-  specified sequence.
+-  If check *Notify Reviewers on Creation*, all possible reviewers will
+   be notified by email when this definition is triggered.
+-  If check *Notify reviewers on reaching pending* if you want to send a
+   notification when pending status is reached. This is usefull in a
+   approve by sequence scenario to only notify reviewers when it is
+   their turn in the sequence.
+-  If check *Comment*, reviewers can comment after click Validate or
+   Reject.
+-  If check *Approve by sequence*, reviewers is forced to review by
+   specified sequence.
 
 To configure Tier Validation Exceptions, you need to:
 
@@ -94,40 +90,42 @@ To configure Tier Validation Exceptions, you need to:
 
 **Note:**
 
-- If you don't create any exception, the Validated record will be
-  readonly and cannot be modified.
-- If check *Write under Validation*, records will be able to be modified
-  only in the defined fields when the Validation process is ongoing.
-- If check *Write after Validation*, records will be able to be modified
-  only in the defined fields when the Validation process is finished.
-- If check *Write after Validation* and *Write under Validation*,
-  records will be able to be modified defined fields always.
+-  If you don't create any exception, the Validated record will be
+   readonly and cannot be modified.
+-  If check *Write under Validation*, records will be able to be
+   modified only in the defined fields when the Validation process is
+   ongoing.
+-  If check *Write after Validation*, records will be able to be
+   modified only in the defined fields when the Validation process is
+   finished.
+-  If check *Write after Validation* and *Write under Validation*,
+   records will be able to be modified defined fields always.
 
 Known issues / Roadmap
 ======================
 
 This is the list of known issues for this module. Any proposal for
 improvement will be very valuable.
 
-- **Issue:**
+-  **Issue:**
 
-  When using approve_sequence option in any tier.definition there can be
-  inconsistencies in the systray notifications.
+   When using approve_sequence option in any tier.definition there can
+   be inconsistencies in the systray notifications.
 
-  **Description:**
+   **Description:**
 
-  Field can_review in tier.review is used to filter out, in the systray
-  notifications, the reviews a user can approve. This can_review field
-  is updated **in the database** in method review_user_count, this can
-  make it very inconsistent for databases with a lot of users and
-  recurring updates that can change the expected behavior.
+   Field can_review in tier.review is used to filter out, in the systray
+   notifications, the reviews a user can approve. This can_review field
+   is updated **in the database** in method review_user_count, this can
+   make it very inconsistent for databases with a lot of users and
+   recurring updates that can change the expected behavior.
 
-- **Migration to 15.0:**
+-  **Migration to 15.0:**
 
-  The parameter \_tier_validation_manual_config will become False, on
-  14.0, the default value is True, as the change is applied after the
-  migration. In order to use the new behavior we need to modify the
-  value on our expected model.
+   The parameter \_tier_validation_manual_config will become False, on
+   14.0, the default value is True, as the change is applied after the
+   migration. In order to use the new behavior we need to modify the
+   value on our expected model.
 
 Changelog
 =========
@@ -149,69 +147,69 @@ Migrated to Odoo 14.
 
 Fixes:
 
-- When using approve_sequence option in any tier.definition there can be
-  inconsistencies in the systray notifications
-- When using approve_sequence, still not approve only the needed
-  sequence, but also other sequence for the same approver
+-  When using approve_sequence option in any tier.definition there can
+   be inconsistencies in the systray notifications
+-  When using approve_sequence, still not approve only the needed
+   sequence, but also other sequence for the same approver
 
 12.0.3.3.1 (2019-12-02)
 -----------------------
 
 Fixes:
 
-- Show comment on Reviews Table.
-- Edit notification with approve_sequence.
+-  Show comment on Reviews Table.
+-  Edit notification with approve_sequence.
 
 12.0.3.3.0 (2019-11-27)
 -----------------------
 
 New features:
 
-- Add comment on Reviews Table.
-- Approve by sequence.
+-  Add comment on Reviews Table.
+-  Approve by sequence.
 
 12.0.3.2.1 (2019-11-26)
 -----------------------
 
 Fixes:
 
-- Remove message_subscribe_users
+-  Remove message_subscribe_users
 
 12.0.3.2.0 (2019-11-25)
 -----------------------
 
 New features:
 
-- Notify reviewers
+-  Notify reviewers
 
 12.0.3.1.0 (2019-07-08)
 -----------------------
 
 Fixes:
 
-- Singleton error
+-  Singleton error
 
 12.0.3.0.0 (2019-12-02)
 -----------------------
 
 Fixes:
 
-- Edit Reviews Table
+-  Edit Reviews Table
 
 12.0.2.1.0 (2019-05-29)
 -----------------------
 
 Fixes:
 
-- Edit drop-down style width and position
+-  Edit drop-down style width and position
 
 12.0.2.0.0 (2019-05-28)
 -----------------------
 
 New features:
 
-- Pass parameters as functions.
-- Add Systray.
+-  Pass parameters as functions.
+-  Add Systray.
 
 12.0.1.0.0 (2019-02-18)
 -----------------------
@@ -254,26 +252,26 @@ Authors
 Contributors
 ------------
 
-- Lois Rilo <[email protected]>
-- Naglis Jonaitis <[email protected]>
-- Adrià Gil Sorribes <[email protected]>
-- Pimolnat Suntian <[email protected]>
-- Pedro Gonzalez <[email protected]>
-- Kitti U. <[email protected]>
-- Saran Lim. <[email protected]>
-- Carlos Lopez <[email protected]>
-- Javier Colmeiro <[email protected]>
-- bosd
-- Evan Soh <[email protected]>
-- Manuel Regidor <[email protected]>
-- Eduardo de Miguel <[email protected]>
-- `XCG Consulting <https://xcg-consulting.fr>`__:
-
-  - Houzéfa Abbasbhay
-
-- Stefan Rijnhart <[email protected]>
-- Kevin Khao <[email protected]>
-- Do Anh Duy <[email protected]>
+-  Lois Rilo <[email protected]>
+-  Naglis Jonaitis <[email protected]>
+-  Adrià Gil Sorribes <[email protected]>
+-  Pimolnat Suntian <[email protected]>
+-  Pedro Gonzalez <[email protected]>
+-  Kitti U. <[email protected]>
+-  Saran Lim. <[email protected]>
+-  Carlos Lopez <[email protected]>
+-  Javier Colmeiro <[email protected]>
+-  bosd
+-  Evan Soh <[email protected]>
+-  Manuel Regidor <[email protected]>
+-  Eduardo de Miguel <[email protected]>
+-  `XCG Consulting <https://xcg-consulting.fr>`__:
+
+   -  Houzéfa Abbasbhay
+
+-  Stefan Rijnhart <[email protected]>
+-  Kevin Khao <[email protected]>
+-  Do Anh Duy <[email protected]>
 
 Other credits
 -------------

base_tier_validation/__manifest__.py

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
 {
     "name": "Base Tier Validation",
     "summary": "Implement a validation process based on tiers.",
-    "version": "18.0.2.0.1",
+    "version": "18.0.2.1.0",
     "development_status": "Mature",
     "maintainers": ["LoisRForgeFlow"],
     "category": "Tools",

base_tier_validation/migrations/18.0.2.1.0/pre-migration.py

@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+# Copyright 2025 Tecnativa - Víctor Martínez
+# License AGPL-3.0 or later (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html).
+
+from openupgradelib import openupgrade
+
+
+@openupgrade.migrate()
+def migrate(env, version):
+    env.cr.execute(
+        """
+        SELECT imf.model
+        FROM ir_model_fields AS imf
+        WHERE imf.name = 'review_ids'
+        AND imf.ttype = 'one2many'
+        AND imf.model != 'tier.validation'
+        """
+    )
+    for (model_name,) in env.cr.fetchall():
+        table_name = model_name.replace(".", "_")
+        # validation_status column
+        if not openupgrade.column_exists(env.cr, table_name, "validation_status"):
+            openupgrade.logged_query(
+                env.cr,
+                f"""
+                ALTER TABLE {table_name}
+                ADD COLUMN IF NOT EXISTS validation_status VARCHAR
+                """,
+            )
+            openupgrade.logged_query(
+                env.cr,
+                f"""
+                UPDATE {table_name} SET validation_status = 'no'
+                """,
+            )
+            openupgrade.logged_query(
+                env.cr,
+                f"""
+                UPDATE {table_name} SET validation_status = 'rejected'
+                WHERE validation_status = 'no' AND id IN (
+                    SELECT DISTINCT(tr.res_id)
+                    FROM tier_review AS tr
+                    WHERE tr.model = '{model_name}' AND tr.status = 'rejected'
+                )
+                """,
+            )
+            openupgrade.logged_query(
+                env.cr,
+                f"""
+                UPDATE {table_name} SET validation_status = 'pending'
+                WHERE validation_status = 'no' AND id IN (
+                    SELECT DISTINCT(tr.res_id)
+                    FROM tier_review AS tr
+                    WHERE tr.model = '{model_name}' AND tr.status = 'pending'
+                )
+                """,
+            )
+            openupgrade.logged_query(
+                env.cr,
+                f"""
+                UPDATE {table_name} SET validation_status = 'waiting'
+                WHERE validation_status = 'no' AND id IN (
+                    SELECT DISTINCT(tr.res_id)
+                    FROM tier_review AS tr
+                    WHERE tr.model = '{model_name}' AND tr.status = 'waiting'
+                )
+                """,
+            )
+            openupgrade.logged_query(
+                env.cr,
+                f"""
+                UPDATE {table_name} SET validation_status = 'validated'
+                WHERE validation_status = 'no' AND id IN (
+                    SELECT DISTINCT(tr.res_id)
+                    FROM tier_review AS tr
+                    WHERE tr.model = '{model_name}'
+                    AND tr.status IN ('approved', 'forwarded')
+                )
+                """,
+            )

base_tier_validation/models/res_users.py

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ def review_user_count(self):
             if tier_review and hasattr(Model, "can_review"):
                 records_domain = [
                     ("id", "in", tier_review.mapped("res_id")),
-                    ("rejected", "=", False),
+                    ("validation_status", "!=", "rejected"),
                     ("can_review", "=", True),
                 ]
                 records = (