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

[16.0][ADD][WIP] account_avatax_exemption_sign_oca #79

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: 16.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dnplkndll
Copy link

@dnplkndll dnplkndll commented Jan 27, 2025

account_avatax_exemption_sign_oca

proposing a new module to streamline the sale tax pdf exemption sign and storage using the sign_oca app and the account_avatax_exemption

we created and used this internal for several years now. Will be adding the account_avatax_exemption_dms next for paper based scan. not in digital signature and then hope to next gave a portal feature allowing the customer to upload or sign request a renewal requirement on a given state sales tax exemption

I wanted to propose the inclusion in oca with very general use case and can then complete test and migrate.

@JordiBForgeFlow @dreispt @atchuthan

@dnplkndll dnplkndll changed the title [16.0][ADD] account_avatax_exemption_sign_oca [16.0][ADD][WIP] account_avatax_exemption_sign_oca Jan 27, 2025
@kobros-tech
Copy link

@dnplkndll
They might need us to add a description of the purpose of this module.

I will work on tests

@kobros-tech kobros-tech force-pushed the 16.0-add-account_avatax_exemption_sign_oca branch 4 times, most recently from 7842a38 to fa73a89 Compare January 28, 2025 18:05
@kobros-tech kobros-tech force-pushed the 16.0-add-account_avatax_exemption_sign_oca branch from fa73a89 to bdee966 Compare January 28, 2025 18:48
Copy link

@AlexPForgeFlow AlexPForgeFlow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Module account_avatax_exemption should be removed from MR as does not belong to this repo.

Comment on lines +12 to +16
@api.depends("state")
def _cancel_sign_request_id(self):
for rec in self:
if rec.state == "cancel":
rec.sign_oca_request_id.cancel()

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
@api.depends("state")
def _cancel_sign_request_id(self):
for rec in self:
if rec.state == "cancel":
rec.sign_oca_request_id.cancel()
def write(self, vals):
if vals.get("state") == "cancel":
self.sign_oca_request_id.cancel()
res = super().write(vals)

@api.depends only would be triggered to compute fields (don't apply in this field), so I suggest changing the logic to handle cases on write method.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks, I added this module in a separate PR.

here I added it only because we wanted to test sign exemption and the module for exemption is not merged in 16.0 branch.

we tried to add it from the PR in test requirements as dependency but didn't succeed.

we can resume discussion about exemption module in its open PR for 16.0 branch.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants