Skip to content

Conversation

@ovnicraft
Copy link
Member

Module from 9.0 is working ok, migrate to 10.0 without major changes

@oca-clabot
Copy link

Hey @ovnicraft, thank you for your Pull Request.

It looks like some users haven't signed our Contributor License Agreement, yet.
You can read and sign our full Contributor License Agreement here: http://odoo-community.org/page/website.cla
Here is a list of the users:

  • Cristian Salamea (no github login found)

Appreciation of efforts,
OCA CLAbot

@ovnicraft ovnicraft changed the title [IMP] migrated sale_require_login and dependency [10.0][IMP] migrated sale_require_login and dependency Apr 11, 2017
@ovnicraft ovnicraft force-pushed the 10.0-migrate-website_sale_require_login branch from 52ea12d to 75950e1 Compare April 11, 2017 14:52
@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

There's already a PR for this module. Please review #138 and maybe propose any change to that branch.

@pedrobaeza pedrobaeza closed this Apr 11, 2017
@ovnicraft
Copy link
Member Author

@pedrobaeza the migration hasta latest commit Nov/2016 this is an issue :(. So if there is no response about this, OCA has any definition about close the abandon PR and continues with another proposed by community ?

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

Well, not exactly a procedure, but when someone doesn't respond in the PR, usual steps is to take over his/her work and create another PR. Continuing from the previous PR work or start from the scratch will depend on the complexity of the changes. Anyway, I see that this module depends on another one, so you should first migrate that one also, isn't it?

@ovnicraft
Copy link
Member Author

@pedrobaeza I migrate both in this PR, so i review their changes and has the same changes (module works without major changes).

Open a new PR for dependency module?

@pedrobaeza
Copy link
Member

Let's see if tomorrow there's an answer, and if not, please open first a PR for the dependency, and then we reuse this one for the website_sale_require_login.

@ovnicraft
Copy link
Member Author

Ok 👍

@iledarn
Copy link

iledarn commented Sep 22, 2017

@pedrobaeza I would like you to take this instead of mine #138, since @ovnicraft has fixed what was not right and so much time has elapsed . Sorry I'm messing up

@yelizariev
Copy link
Member

yelizariev commented Sep 22, 2017

Seems like @yajo's review are not taken into account. At least two obvious requests (move assets.xml to demo and runbot link) are not done

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.

5 participants