[ADD] cooperator_worker_force

[robinkeunen]

On partner form, tick "Force Worker" box to set this partner
as a worker even if they are not an effective cooperator.

Checklist before approval

• Tests are present (or not needed).
• Credits/copyright have been changed correctly.
• Change log snippet is present.
• (If a new module) Moving this to OCA has been considered.

[robinkeunen]

@tfrancoi I moved all the worker_store relayed stuff in a separated module. This should not affect polln but it might be a good idea to have a look.

[robinkeunen]

@polchampion This is deployed on test server (except demain). The Force Worker functionality was moved to a new module cooperator_worker_force. I suggest to test

1. that the computation of is_worker is still correct before installing the new module
2. that the computation of is_worker takes worker_store (Force Worker) into account after installing the module.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #461 (f80c887) into 12.0 (fa7679b) will increase coverage by 21.50%.
The diff coverage is 80.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             12.0     #461       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   39.26%   60.76%   +21.50%     
===========================================
  Files          44      153      +109     
  Lines        1541     5251     +3710     
  Branches      293      926      +633     
===========================================
+ Hits          605     3191     +2586     
- Misses        933     1917      +984     
- Partials        3      143      +140     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
cooperator_worker_force/models/res_partner.py	60.00% <60.00%> (ø)
beesdoo_shift/models/res_partner.py	41.37% <100.00%> (+14.02%)	⬆️
cooperator_worker/models/res_partner.py	100.00% <100.00%> (+70.96%)	⬆️
cooperator_worker_force/models/__init__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cooperator_worker_force/tests/__init__.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
cooperator_worker_force/tests/test_worker_store.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
polln_shift/models/res_partner.py	50.00% <100.00%> (+8.33%)	⬆️
beesdoo_shift_swap/models/shift_swap.py	63.41% <0.00%> (ø)
...eesdoo_shift_swap/tests/test_beesdoo_shift_swap.py	100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
beesdoo_shift_swap/models/dated_template.py	26.36% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 113 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

[polchampion]

@robinkeunen Sucessfully tested on lepedalo-test

• the computation of is_worker is correct before and after installing the new module
• the computation of is_worker takes worker_store (Force Worker) into account after installing the module.
• the module seems compatible with share operations involving change in share that allow owner to work and not.

[victor-champonnois]

Just one comment, I am not finished ;)

[victor-champonnois]

LGTM.

About the whole worker/allow_working logic, wouldn't it be simpler to set is_worker as a related field from the share's allow_working ?

• The field related field could be stored, so we wouldn't have to write search methods
• The field could be not readonly, so it could be modified on the interface.

[robinkeunen]

I would be a simpler design indeed but a cooperator can have multiple shares so a simple related field won't do. We could have a "main share" field like "main seller" but it would be part of bigger refactoring which is already part of issue OCA/cooperative#18

[victor-champonnois]

I would be a simpler design indeed but a cooperator can have multiple shares so a simple related field won't do. We could have a "main share" field like "main seller" but it would be part of bigger refactoring which is already part of issue OCA/cooperative#18

Ah yes, forgot about that 👍

[github-grap-bot]

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

[robinkeunen]

/ocabot merge major

[github-grap-bot]

What a great day to merge this nice PR. Let's do it!
Prepared branch 12.0-ocabot-merge-pr-461-by-robinkeunen-bump-major, awaiting test results.

[github-grap-bot]

@robinkeunen your merge command was aborted due to failed check(s), which you can inspect on this commit of 12.0-ocabot-merge-pr-461-by-robinkeunen-bump-major.

After fixing the problem, you can re-issue a merge command. Please refrain from merging manually as it will most probably make the target branch red.

[robinkeunen]

/ocabot merge major

[github-grap-bot]

Hey, thanks for contributing! Proceeding to merge this for you.
Prepared branch 12.0-ocabot-merge-pr-461-by-robinkeunen-bump-major, awaiting test results.

[github-grap-bot]

@robinkeunen your merge command was aborted due to failed check(s), which you can inspect on this commit of 12.0-ocabot-merge-pr-461-by-robinkeunen-bump-major.

After fixing the problem, you can re-issue a merge command. Please refrain from merging manually as it will most probably make the target branch red.

[github-grap-bot]

@robinkeunen your merge command was aborted due to failed check(s), which you can inspect on this commit of 12.0-ocabot-merge-pr-461-by-robinkeunen-bump-major.

After fixing the problem, you can re-issue a merge command. Please refrain from merging manually as it will most probably make the target branch red.

[robinkeunen]

/ocabot rebase

[github-grap-bot]

Congratulations, PR rebased to 12.0.

[robinkeunen]

/ocabot merge major

[github-grap-bot]

What a great day to merge this nice PR. Let's do it!
Prepared branch 12.0-ocabot-merge-pr-461-by-robinkeunen-bump-major, awaiting test results.

[github-grap-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 775bb55. Thanks a lot for contributing to beescoop. ❤️