Not possible to get a value from a tab when in detail
Description
Environment
Attachments
Activity
Carlos Ruiz May 26, 2015 at 10:51 PM
Found that because of this commit https://bitbucket.org/idempiere/idempiere/commits/903fffa
tab context for IDs is written as "" instead of nulls
Changed Env.java to cope with this situation
Carlos Ruiz May 26, 2015 at 9:35 PM
Orlando from Ambato notified on IRC about a failure caused by this ticket:
http://www.globalqss.com/idempiere/irclog/%23idempiere.2015-05-26.log.html#t2015-05-26T20:44:10
Replenish report is not showing the list of Document Types
Nicolas Micoud May 14, 2015 at 11:49 AM
Hi and ; tested the patch locally and it seems ok here.
Will put it in our dev instance.
Thanks a lot !
Regards,
Nicolas
Diego Ruiz May 13, 2015 at 5:42 PM
HI , attached to this ticket you can find the patch with the solution.
I tested it with reports, forms, and different levels of tabs. Please test it and tell me any problems you find.
Regards,
Diego Ruiz
BX Service GmbH
Jan Thielemann September 4, 2014 at 10:37 AM
Added screenshots for clarification.
In the first screen, you see that after the sub tab is loaded for the first time, c_tax_ids are loaded correctly based on the dynamic validation.
In the second and third screen, we change the c_taxcategory_id.
Fourth screen shows the problem: c_tax_id is not revalidated.
In the fifth screen, you see that validation works when the tab is in master view mode.
Screen six and seven show that dynamic validation workd even in grid mode when the tab is shown as master tab.
So the problem is that the validation only doesn't work when the tab is in detail mode
Following https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/idempiere/CxFbQmGeofw
and on IRC :
[22:54] <nmicoud> hi everyone ! can someone have a look there please : https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/idempiere/CxFbQmGeofw ; i don't know if i find a bug or if i just need to go to bed ?
[23:43] <@CarlosRuiz> nmicoud, looks similar to another recent finding from you - when you're editing in detail panel the context variables are set to the master record
[23:43] <@CarlosRuiz> we solved it using @1|C_TaxCategory_ID@
[23:44] <nmicoud> yes, but it was on the process parameter panel
[23:44] <nmicoud> and seems that the @x|..._ID@ notation doesn't work in dynamic validation
[23:45] <nmicoud> or i was not able to make it work
[23:45] <@CarlosRuiz> must work - is the same context variable passed to parameter panel
[23:45] <nmicoud> so, the bug is between the chair and the keyboard ?
[23:45] <nmicoud> will try again then
[23:46] <@CarlosRuiz> the interface
[23:50] <nmicoud> nope, it doesn't work : here the dynamic validation i'm using :
[23:50] <nmicoud> C_Tax.C_TaxCategory_ID=@1|C_TaxCategory_ID@
[23:50] <nmicoud> do you see something wrong ?
[23:51] <@CarlosRuiz> you can check the context and see if there is a variable with those values
[23:51] <@CarlosRuiz> 1|C_TaxCategory_ID
[23:52] <nmicoud> => 2|1|C_TaxCategory_ID == 1000000
[23:52] <@CarlosRuiz> yep - that's correct
[23:52] <nmicoud> but if i change, the value of the tax category, the tax list is not updated
[23:53] <nmicoud> but the context is updated
[23:53] <nmicoud> eg: 2|1|C_TaxCategory_ID == 1000009
[23:55] <@CarlosRuiz> interesting
[23:55] <nmicoud> yes
[23:56] <@CarlosRuiz> must be related with resolution of dependent fields
[23:56] <nmicoud> i think
[23:57] <@CarlosRuiz> look at GridField line 304
[23:57] <@CarlosRuiz> Evaluator.parseDepends(list, m_lookup.getValidation());
[23:59] <nmicoud> it will never do something
[00:01] <@CarlosRuiz> so, maybe a better discovery is needed in GridTab.hasDependants and getDependantFields ?
[00:02] <nmicoud> why m_lookup.getValidation() return "" ? (on GridField line 304) ?
[00:03] <@CarlosRuiz> is a method to be overridden
[00:03] <@CarlosRuiz> must use MLookup when running
[00:05] <nmicoud> ah yes
[00:05] <nmicoud> the parseDepends in Evaluator doesn't care about the |
[00:13] <nmicoud> Carlos, it's getting late here and i will have to go ; should i open a jira ticket ?
[00:14] <@CarlosRuiz> yes, I think capturing in detail must be broken because of that
[00:14] <nmicoud> ok, will create one then