Dashboard

You're right, I corrected it

You're right, I corrected it

OLMIS-6953: Cached VVM status, caching draft extracted into a separated function

We don't need it, I haven't noticed that checkUnaccountedStockAdjustments is called by quantityChanged. Thank you Klaudia!

We don't need it, I haven't noticed that checkUnaccountedStockAdjustments is called by quantityChanged. Thank you Klaudia!

Draft object is available here and the data is correctly saved to local storage

Draft object is available here and the data is correctly saved to local storage

Is the draft object available here? Shouldn't we pass the draft as an argument in this function?

Is the draft object available here? Shouldn't we pass the draft as an argument in this function?

Do we need this here since we use the same method in checkUnaccountedStockAdjustments?

Do we need this here since we use the same method in checkUnaccountedStockAdjustments?

I think we also need to cache VVM status while offline.

I think we also need to cache VVM status while offline.

OLMIS-6953: Removed physical-inventory-draft-watcher, passed a flag to the saving-indicator instead...
OLMIS-6953: Removed physical-inventory-draft-watcher, passed a flag to the saving-indicator instead...
OLMIS-6953: Removed physical-inventory-draft-watcher, passed a flag to the saving-indicator instead of an object

OLMIS-6950: Added missing pagable parameter in UserRepository
OLMIS-6950: Added missing pagable parameter in UserRepository
OLMIS-6950: Added missing pagable parameter in UserRepository

OLMIS-6953: Improved performance of adding products to a Physical Inventory
OLMIS-6953: Improved performance of adding products to a Physical Inventory
OLMIS-6953: Improved performance of adding products to a Physical Inventory

Previously, the lack of this annotation made OrderableChildDto not map correctly, but it could have been caused by some cache in build. After verifying this without this annotation application beha...

Previously, the lack of this annotation made OrderableChildDto not map correctly, but it could have been caused by some cache in build. After verifying this without this annotation application behaves correctly so it was removed.

So essentially, we don't know but it works

So essentially, we don't know but it works

During the tests, when I use JsonIgnore without JsonProperty I can't set id orderable through setter, which is strange behavior, only when both annotations are saved it all starts working properly....

During the tests, when I use JsonIgnore without JsonProperty I can't set id orderable through setter, which is strange behavior, only when both annotations are saved it all starts working properly. Although it is written in the documentation that JsonIgnore excludes JsonProperty, removing the property annotation from OrderableChildDto results in errors in the integration test.

It looks like the test properly covers this problem. Could you explain why this change fixes it though? And why we are using json ignore with json property? Based on javadcos it looks like json ign...

It looks like the test properly covers this problem. Could you explain why this change fixes it though? And why we are using json ignore with json property? Based on javadcos it looks like json ignore has precedence over this - https://fasterxml.github.io/jackson-annotations/javadoc/2.6/com/fasterxml/jackson/annotation/JsonProperty.Access.html

Is there anything else here that needs to change?

Is there anything else here that needs to change?