[5027][ADD] partner_search_alias #28
Conversation
| <record id="view_res_partner_filter" model="ir.ui.view"> | ||
| <field name="name">res.partner.select</field> | ||
| <field name="model">res.partner</field> | ||
| <field name="inherit_id" ref="base.view_res_partner_filter" /> | ||
| <field name="arch" type="xml"> | ||
| <field name="name" position="attributes"> | ||
| <!-- add search_alias to name search --> | ||
| <attribute | ||
| name="filter_domain" | ||
| >['|', '|', '|', '|', '|', ('display_name', 'ilike', self), ('ref', '=', self), ('email', 'ilike', self), ('vat', 'ilike', self), ('company_registry', 'ilike', self), ('search_alias', 'ilike', self)]</attribute> | ||
| </field> | ||
| </field> | ||
| </record> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We might want to consider the approach of extending the get_view() method instead, in a similar manner as https://github.com/oca/sale-workflow/blob/3625fea/sale_partner_selectable_option/models/sale_order.py#L12-L24. That way we should be able to avoid the risk of conflicts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I still think this approach can lead to unintended behavior if there are some modules that add new domain at the first place of domain lists (eg, [('new_field', '=', 'value'), '|', '|', '|', '|', ('display_name', 'ilike', self), ('ref', '=', self), ('email', 'ilike', self), ('vat', 'ilike', self), ('company_registry', 'ilike', self)])
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't that be cleared by using expression.OR()?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we consider there will be only OR concatenations for domain of name search? If so, yes.
In my opinion, I consider there is rare chance of using AND concatenation for name search domain.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@AungKoKoLin1997 I can't imagine a case where AND is suitable for the name search. Besides, I don't see the downside of using expression.OR() compared to the domain override if that works.
5027