| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Otherwise, users will ending up with broken templates if
they update from v12
closes odoo/odoo#47120
X-original-commit: 3f84cae060c62839e8d493c0b90539363469f5f3
Signed-off-by: Toufik Benjaa (tbe) <tbe@odoo.com>
|
|
RATIONALE
Mail template model holds a field telling odoo mail engine to automatically
add the current user's signature to the body. Its use depends on the use
case
* using the template in the composer on a single record: it is displayed
in the rendered template in the composer, meaning people could change it.
This behavior is interesting as it allows to see the email content;
* using the template in the composer in mass mail mode: it is not displayed
as only the raw jinja is displayed. It is therefore not obvious that it
will be appended to the body of the mail. People could add it manually and
have 2 signatures as a result;
A mechanism automatically adding a signature to sent emails when posting a
message is already implemented and is based on template existence. If a
template has been used when posting, no signature is added in sent emails.
Otherwise it is automatically added. This behavior should not change.
Behavior will therefore be
* use a template -> specify signature usage in it manually through jinja;
* do not use a template -> signature added in sent emails;
SPECIFICATIONS
Remove user_signature.
Update template body accordingly. In customer oriented templates that are using
it and do not already contain it, manually add a call to user.signature within
the jinja code. When set to False, just remove its declaration.
Quickly clean some signature integration.
LINKS
Task ID 2089252
Community PR odoo/odoo#39482
Enterprise PR odoo/enterprise#6459
Upgrade PR odoo/upgrate#761
Related: odoo/enterprise#6459
Related: odoo/upgrade#761
Signed-off-by: Thibault Delavallee (tde) <tde@openerp.com>
Co-authored-by: Michaël Mattiello <mcm@odoo.com>
Co-authored-by: Thibault Delavallée <tde@odoo.com>
|
|
PURPOSE
As new features are about to land in survey, notably live interactions [1]
and new survey building [2] performing a pre cleaning is necessary. In this
PR we clean survey models by: removing unnecessary fields, cleaning some code
and finally renaming models.
SPECIFICATIONS: RENAME THANKS_YOU_MESSAGE ON SURVEY.SURVEY
On survey.survey, rename thanks_you_message to description_done
In this commit we rename thanks_you_message field. Indeed for certifications
or recruitment form, "thank you" is not really the unique content you
would get in a post-survey message. We therefore rename it to description_done
to better indicate its use.
SPECIFICATIONS: RENAME CERTIFICATE ON SURVEY.SURVEY
On survey.survey, rename certificate field to certification
All certification related fields on survey model begin with certification_ .
Only the boolean one telling if a survey is a certification or not is called
certificate. In order to ease grep and ordering it is renamed to certification.
SPECIFICATIONS: RENAME PASSING_SCORE ON SURVEY.SURVEY
on survey.survey, rename passing_score field to scoring_success_min
``passing_score`` field name is not really the best name we could find.
Renaming the field using a ``scoring_`` prefix allow to know this field
is linked to the scoring mechanism.
LINKS
[0] Related to Task ID 2061901 (survey models cleaning and preparation)
[1] Task ID 1972640 (live interactions)
[2] Task ID 2119587 (new frontend for building surveys)
PR #40765
|
|
PURPOSE
As new features are about to land in survey, notably live interactions [1]
and new survey building [2] performing a pre cleaning is necessary. In this
PR we clean survey models by: removing unnecessary fields, cleaning some code
and finally renaming models.
SPECIFICATIONS: QUESTION FIELD ON SURVEY.SURVEY
On survey.survey, remove question field, unnecessary related on title.
Question model holds two fields for its title: ``title`` and ``question``.
Question is simply a related on title, making the two fields completely
redundant. It is mainly due to historical reasons, when updating models for
certifications and eLearning. In this commit we keep only title field and
remove the question related field as it adds unnecessary complexity to the
model.
SPECIFICATIONS: INPUT_TYPE FIELD ON SURVEY.USER_INPUT
On survey.user_input, remove input_type and its garbage collect.
``input_type`` field exists on user input model to tell whether answer has
been created through invite or through manual click on a survey page. It
has been added a long time ago when surveys were either open to everyone,
either closed and on invite only.
Since eLearning and certification surveys access mode on surveys has evolved.
Notably being able to distinguish invite from manual survey user input is not
necessary anymore. Indeed what is important is the way people can reach the
survey, not how they created their user input.
Invitation creates token and this can be used if people effectively want to
find invitation-related user inputs.
Since 09ea5c7d49d544927542130078ab6e3ad5b70584 manual entries still in draft are garbage collected.
Reason is still unclear as it is not obvious that tons of unnecessary entries
will be created. As this seems like unnecessary optimization this commit
removes that feature along with the input_type field.
SPECIFICATIONS: REPLACE URLS FIELDS BY METHODS ON SURVEY.{SURVEY, USER_INPUT}
On survey.{survey, user_input}, remove url fields replaced by methods
In this commit we remove some remaining of URL fields that are better found
using methods. Both survey and user input holds a "start" url field that is
replaced by a method call ``get_start_url`` on both survey (generic) and
user input (token specific) models. We also introduced a ``get_print_url``
method doing the same for the printable version of survey / user input.
SPECIFICATIONS: REMOVE CATEGORY FIELD ON SURVEY.SURVEY
On survey.survey, remove unused category field.
Survey model holds a ``category`` field whose purpose is to be able to somehow
categorize surveys according to their use. However using this field is not
easy as it is hidden and is a simple selection field. Module should add their
own key. Its sole use is in ``hr_recruitment_survey`` which is a niche module.
Let us clean models and lessen model complexity.
LINKS
[0] Related to Task ID 2061901 (survey models cleaning and preparation)
[1] Task ID 1972640 (live interactions)
[2] Task ID 2119587 (new frontend for building surveys)
PR #40765
|
|
Purpose of this commit is to give a way to access to company email and catchall
with formatting. Those will be used in various automated emails. Indeed
currently several templates use either ``company_id.partner_id.email``,
``company_id.email``, or even don't provide fallback values.
With this commit from a company record people will be able to use
* a correctly formatted catchall: ``"My Company Name"
<catchall_alias@catchall_domain>``
* an email_formatted field like partner email_formatted that is either its
partner-related email_formatted value, or formatted catchall if its partner
is not correctly configured;
Various calls to mail creation are updated accordingly.
Task ID 1853147
PR #32243
|
|
Otherwise public users cannot receive their certification. Indeed email_from
will be the one of public user which is probably not set.
Task 2067872 (eLearning internal testing)
Task 2058598 (survey internal testing)
PR #36756
|
|
Purpose: add lang definition on templates where it is missing
Related to task 1972615
Linked to PR #32872
|
|
Purpose: use more email_formatted when possible, clean and simplify
email_from, email_to and partner_to computation.
Next step is to try to extract some common patterns in tools or methods in
order to simplify template creation and customization.
Related to task 1972615
Linked to PR #32872
|
|
Purpose
=======
The certification email template had both "email_to" and "partner_to" fields set
and that implied the mail being sent twice.
This commit removes the "partner_to" field to fix it.
|
|
Purpose
=======
This commit reworks some views to rename 'Survey' to 'Certification'
for a better visual integration of the new certification flow.
|
|
Task #1902306
Purpose
=======
This commit adds certification capabilities to the survey module.
A certification is a survey with the "certification" flag set to true than can be linked
to a certification email template that contains a certification document (PDF).
This template can be edited by the user in the technical settings to customize the certification email/document.
To be able to implement this certification concept, we also have to add scoring mechanisms to surveys.
survey.questions of type 'simple_choice' and 'multiple_choice' now have scores for the suggested answers.
These question scores allow to compute a global score that is used to determine whether the user has successfully
passed the certification or not.
As additional features, we also have:
- A time limit with an interface timer that limits the test to X minutes
When reached, the survey is automatically submitted and unregistered (= unsubmitted) answers are not taken into account.
- A limited number of attempts for the survey/certification
If reached, the user can't take the survey/certification anymore
The 'survey result' layout was adapted accordingly to show the success rate of participants and the correct answers
to the survey questions.
Specs
=======
- Create a new survey :
- Add a description field for the survey
- Options on a survey :
- Passing score : (sum of all good answers) in %
- If No scoring => No passing score, no certificate
- If Scoring with answers => Passing score and can see the answers (can create certificate)
- If Scoring without answers => Passing score but can't review the answers at the end (can create certificate)
- for the questions, if "no scoring" selected, can 't see the option "good answer" and "score" on the questions
- If the 2 others options, can see the options "good answer" and "score" on the questions
- all the types of questions are available for each option.
- Questions
- Add the option correct answer on the multiples questions (one or more good answers)
- Certifications
- If scoring, force "mandatory" for "mutliple choices (1or multiple answers)"
- On the dashboard => visual information that this specific survey is a certification
- Time Limit : The student is informed on the home screen of the survey of the time limit.
The clock start when he clicks on "start survey"
- Template of the certificate : send email with attachment PDF
- Front-end :
- Add some margin
- Replace "Back to survey" with the blue-bar from the portal
- Add a timer (start when the survey starts)
- Add a progress bar (number of section and number of question inside the section)
- Analyse of the results :
- First a global graph with the number of people who''ve participated and passed the test
- Stages of a survey :
- Remove the stage "Permanent"
- 3 stages :
- draft : not on-line but can be tested (with phantom token)
- In progress : on-line
- closed : not on-line
- Who can test a survey : the manager and the user. Add this condition to the phantom token.
|
|
Purpose of this commit is to use an access token to access survey instead
of their ID. Routes are updated to use that token instead of the survey ID.
Purpose is to have less discoverable routes and be able to control a bit more
survey access even if it is not really a security parameter.
Some renaming is performed to avoid confusion in terms. Survey token and
answer token are now clearly labeled differently in the code to know which
model we are working on.
Some templates are updated to directly use the answer as base record to
have access to token and test_entry fields instead of giving those parameter
values directly in the controller. It makes some more diff but also allow
easier edition and improvement in templates when having directly survey
and answer record available.
This commit is linked to task ID 1932508 and PR #30508.
|
|
Purpose of this commit is to improve the recently-introduced mail template
used to invite people to surveys. Containing
* fix the display of deadline that is not required;
* correctly talk about survey, not apparaisal;
This commit is linked to task ID 1932508 (side-dish fix).
closes odoo/odoo#30537
|
|
Purpose of this merge is to remove the ugly __URL__ hack of survey templates.
It is solved by making template rendered on user_input model. This means each
invitation recipient will received its own rendered mail. Small jinja code
allows therefore to include the url in a clean odoo-style way.
Subject and body in survey invite wizard are not rendered anymore. It means
jinja could be displayed. This is necessary as this wizard will work in batch
mode, rendering the body on each recipient.
This commit is linked to task ID 1911586 and PR #28986.
|
|
In this commit we improve templates used in survey. Purpose of this commit
is to have templates that embed or use standard Odoo email layouts to make
them look modern and have a common style across all emails.
Main guidelines
* better use of div / p / br to try to lessen layout issues, especially
when updating templates using the editor;
* correctly sequence the templates fields definition;
* correctly set templates values notably auto_delete and user_signature
fields to avoid confusion;
* correctly layout the email content using light notification email. It
can either propagate the layout choice through various send mail methods
or directly embed the styling in the templates for more technical or
complex templates;
* use email_formatted computed field when possible to avoid having hand-made
from / to addresses;
* fix various typos and improve subjects when necessary;
Content of emails is not necessarily updated as the purpose of this task is
about styling, not content itself.
This commit is linked to task ID 1843224 (and 1868112) and to PR #25313
(and #25889).
|
