openlmis-requisition

Clone Tools
  • last updated a few seconds ago
Constraints
Constraints: committers
 
Constraints: files
Constraints: dates
Released requisition v7.0.0

Changed requisition version to 7.0.0-SNAPSHOT

Release requisition v7.0.0-RC3

OLMIS-5228: renamed test for emergency requisitions for report only period

The title of this test suggest that we wouldn't create a requisition if it is both emergence and report only and yet I can see that we have a requisition, but non-report-only one. As per ticket it ...

The title of this test suggest that we wouldn't create a requisition if it is both emergence and report only and yet I can see that we have a requisition, but non-report-only one. As per ticket it totally makes sense, but the name is a little misleading.

OLMIS-5242: Added supervisory node reset after rejection
OLMIS-5242: Added supervisory node reset after rejection
OLMIS-5242: Added supervisory node reset after rejection

OLMIS-5228: fixed getting template for emergency requisition in report only period

what about line 51 in RequisitionTemplateService? From what I see we hide order related columns and we should probably don't do that for emergency requisitions

what about line 51 in RequisitionTemplateService? From what I see we hide order related columns and we should probably don't do that for emergency requisitions

OLMIS-5228: disabled report only requisitions for emergency
OLMIS-5228: disabled report only requisitions for emergency
OLMIS-5228: disabled report only requisitions for emergency

Changed Version to 7.0.0-SNAPSHOT

Changed Version to 7.0.0-RC2

Changed Version to 7.0.0-SNAPSHOT

Update release version to v7.0.0-RC1

I checked and it works. I did not know that we can use inner join in this way. I always thought that after ON we need to create a statement that would use at least one field from each table https:/...

I checked and it works. I did not know that we can use inner join in this way. I always thought that after ON we need to create a statement that would use at least one field from each table

OLMIS-5148: Adjusted the migration

So this doesn't give the same result? SELECT t.id, a.id, a.definition, c.count + 1, a.indicator, false, a.label, a.name, NULL, 0, a.name, NULL FROM requisition.requisition_templates AS t INNER ...

So this doesn't give the same result?

SELECT
	t.id, a.id, a.definition, c.count + 1, a.indicator, false, a.label, a.name, NULL, 0, a.name, NULL
FROM
	requisition.requisition_templates AS t
	INNER JOIN (SELECT requisitiontemplateid, count(*) FROM requisition.columns_maps GROUP BY requisitiontemplateid) AS c ON c.requisitiontemplateid = t.id
	INNER JOIN requisition.available_requisition_columns AS a ON a.name = 'additionalQuantityRequired'


If not, feel free to resolve.

I don't think there is a way to join those two columns also because I need to add the column to all templates I need the Cartesian product

I don't think there is a way to join those two columns also because I need to add the column to all templates I need the Cartesian product

No, I mean we are creating a cross join, but I would prefer if it was made into an inner join with the 'additionalQuantityRequired' as part of the ON clause. I think it makes it more clear how they...

No, I mean we are creating a cross join, but I would prefer if it was made into an inner join with the 'additionalQuantityRequired' as part of the ON clause. I think it makes it more clear how they are being joined.

cross join and join by comma are basically the same thing. Should I change it to the cross join?

cross join and join by comma are basically the same thing. Should I change it to the cross join?

What kind of join is it when you join by comma? Isn't it a cross join, and not the way we want to join the tables?

What kind of join is it when you join by comma? Isn't it a cross join, and not the way we want to join the tables?

OLMIS-5148: Extended migration to add column to all req templates
OLMIS-5148: Extended migration to add column to all req templates