[16.0][MIG]project_task_recurring_activity: migration to 16.0

[PicchiSeba]

No description provided.

[aleuffre]

Code review, LGTM

[rousseldenis]

/ocabot migration project_task_recurring_activity

[PicchiSeba]

Compared to the previous version, with the deletion of the onchange lines 83-84 of recurring_activity.py are never hit. Should we remove the check entirely or restore (at least a part of) the previous behavior?

[rousseldenis]

Compared to the previous version, with the deletion of the onchange lines 83-84 of recurring_activity.py are never hit. Should we remove the check entirely or restore part of the previous behavior?

No, that's ok, only the #84. I suppose because user_id is already set. If you want to improve coverage, do a test without assigning a user (or a default ?)

[PicchiSeba]

If you want to improve coverage, do a test without assigning a user (or a default ?)

With the current implementation it is not possible not to assign a user. That's why at the current state those checks are not useful. The issue lies in required=True.

Maybe we could remove that requirement from the field but maintain the same behavior.
For example we could add checks in the write method that, if not user is set, we use the one defined in activity_type_id, and if it doesn't have an user too then we raise an error.

[PicchiSeba]

I removed the check for user_id because it was unnecessary