Merge lp:~the-clone-master/ocb-addons/6.1-lp1132963-hr_payroll_missing_AND_on_get_contract into lp:ocb-addons/6.1

[Mario Arias]

[Holger Brunn (Therp) (hbrunn)]

can you explain how this does anything? '&' is the default operator, so both lines should be equivalent.

review: Needs Information

[Stefan Rijnhart (Opener) (stefan-opener)]

The default operator is deceptive in combined expressions (not fully shown in the diff):

Here is the full expression before the fix:

('employee_id', '=', employee.id),
'|',
    '|'
        '&',
            ('date_end', '<=', date_to),('date_end','>=', date_from)
        '&',
            ('date_start', '<=', date_to),('date_start','>=', date_from)
    ('date_start','<=', date_from),
'|',
    ('date_end', '=', False),
    ('date_end','>=', date_to)

The highest level, including the two '|' operators are governed by two implicit '&' operators, if I understand correctly.

After Mario's fix, the expression looks different:

('employee_id', '=', employee.id),
'|',
    '|'
        '&',
            ('date_end', '<=', date_to),('date_end','>=', date_from)
        '&',
            ('date_start', '<=', date_to),('date_start','>=', date_from)
    '&',
        ('date_start','<=', date_from),
        '|',
            ('date_end', '=', False),
            ('date_end','>=', date_to)

Although it makes my brain hurt, this does validate contracts with an end date within the date range, so that it solves the bug.

review: Approve

[Mario Arias (the-clone-master)]

Hi Holger,

As Stefan perfectly described, when generating the complete expression, the lack of the '&' in the third condition effectively changed the meaning as
       ('date_start','<=', date_from)

was required for "ALL" searches instead of only for the third condition...

Regards,
-Mario

[Holger Brunn (Therp) (hbrunn)]

Ah, now I see. Sorry for not looking at the whole expression in the first place, it was early in the morning...

review: Approve

[Mario Arias (the-clone-master)]

My fault Holger, as I should have explained what this was about...

Thanks for your time and support !!

What is next now? Is there any other step on my side or are we done?

[Stefan Rijnhart (Opener) (stefan-opener)]

BTW I did not transcribe the expression to show you how clever I am but to understand it myself in the first place ;-)

Mario, we will leave this MP open for a couple of days to give other people a chance to look at it. It will be merged afterwards. As the problem presumably still exists on 7.0 (OpenERP fix was against current trunk), could you push a branch against ocb-addons/7.0 as well? That way we won't suffer the regression when we update.

[Mario Arias (the-clone-master)]

Definitely will do MP for 7.0,

I just wanted to be sure I completed the whole process fine, before
going on with other fixes, (and I had to get 7.0 series from OCB...)

Regards,
-Mario

On 04/18/2013 11:16 AM, Stefan Rijnhart (Therp) wrote:
> BTW I did not transcribe the expression to show you how clever I am but to understand it myself in the first place ;-)
>
> Mario, we will leave this MP open for a couple of days to give other people a chance to look at it. It will be merged afterwards. As the problem presumably still exists on 7.0 (OpenERP fix was against current trunk), could you push a branch against ocb-addons/7.0 as well? That way we won't suffer the regression when we update.
>

=== modified file 'hr_payroll/hr_payroll.py'
--- hr_payroll/hr_payroll.py	2012-01-31 13:36:57 +0000
+++ hr_payroll/hr_payroll.py	2013-04-18 06:26:28 +0000
@@ -375,7 +375,7 @@
         #OR if it starts between the given dates
         clause_2 = ['&',('date_start', '<=', date_to),('date_start','>=', date_from)]
         #OR if it starts before the date_from and finish after the date_end (or never finish)
-        clause_3 = [('date_start','<=', date_from),'|',('date_end', '=', False),('date_end','>=', date_to)]
+        clause_3 = ['&',('date_start','<=', date_from),'|',('date_end', '=', False),('date_end','>=', date_to)]
         clause_final =  [('employee_id', '=', employee.id),'|','|'] + clause_1 + clause_2 + clause_3
         contract_ids = contract_obj.search(cr, uid, clause_final, context=context)
         return contract_ids