Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[15.0][MIG] fieldservice_portal: Migration to 15.0 #1289

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: 15.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ppyczko
Copy link

@ppyczko ppyczko commented Dec 12, 2024

Module migrated to version 15.0. The migration commit has been backported from the 16.0 migration.

cc https://github.com/APSL 164778

@miquelalzanillas @lbarry-apsl @mpascuall @peluko00 @javierobcn @BernatObrador please review

Additionally, the [FIX] addresses an error encountered during pipeline execution (see attached image).

imagen

I modified the 'order' variable to 'fsm_order' to resolve errors that occur when the module is installed alongside the Purchase module. In the v16 and v17 field-service repositories, the fieldservice_purchase module isn't available, so the Purchase module isn't being installed automatically and doesn't create conflicts. However, in field-service v15, the fieldservice_purchase module exists. Due to changes introduced between v14 and v15 in the 'portal_templates.xml' file of the Purchase module, the code incorrectly interprets 'order' as an FSM order instead of a purchase order, leading to conflicts.

This change has been included in a separate commit to allow for easier forwarding to newer versions if required.

@ppyczko ppyczko force-pushed the 15.0-mig-fieldservice_portal branch 8 times, most recently from 3980a07 to a770f0c Compare December 12, 2024 13:08
@ppyczko ppyczko force-pushed the 15.0-mig-fieldservice_portal branch from a770f0c to 12899b1 Compare December 12, 2024 14:00
@ppyczko ppyczko marked this pull request as ready for review December 12, 2024 14:18
Copy link
Contributor

@peluko00 peluko00 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, tested in runboat

Copy link

@mpascuall mpascuall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, tested in runboat

@ppyczko
Copy link
Author

ppyczko commented Dec 17, 2024

Hi @max3903, sorry to ping you directly. Could you review if this is ready to merge when you have a moment please? Thank you!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants