8000 [IMP] accounting: reports groupby non-stored fields by Megaaaaaa · Pull Request #13126 · odoo/documentation · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to content

[IMP] accounting: reports groupby non-stored fields #13126

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 18.0
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Megaaaaaa
Copy link
Contributor

In 18.0, this commit added the ability to group by fields that are non stored. This commit adds documentation about how to use the feature.


task-4698321

@robodoo
Copy link
Collaborator
robodoo commented Apr 28, 2025

Pull request status dashboard

8000

@C3POdoo C3POdoo requested a review from a team April 28, 2025 14:31
@Megaaaaaa Megaaaaaa force-pushed the 18.0-doc_reports_groupby_related_non_stored-thbe branch 2 times, most recently from e9ed34d to b5e1681 Compare April 29, 2025 06:35
@dade-odoo dade-odoo self-assigned this May 8, 2025
@dade-odoo dade-odoo removed the request for review from a team May 8, 2025 06:36
@dade-odoo dade-odoo force-pushed the 18.0-doc_reports_groupby_related_non_stored-thbe branch from b5e1681 to e4502a1 Compare May 16, 2025 10:50
In 18.0, [this commit](odoo/enterprise@3fcf1ae) added the ability to group by fields that are
non stored. This commit adds documentation about how to use the feature.

task-4698321
@dade-odoo dade-odoo force-pushed the 18.0-doc_reports_groupby_related_non_stored-thbe branch from e4502a1 to 2e4b476 Compare May 16, 2025 11:28
@dade-odoo
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @Megaaaaaa , thanks for your patience on this one as we have a bit of a backlog for accounting/localization documentation reviews. Rather than send a bunch of comments nitpicking on changes, I've made the changes myself, focusing on RST format, avoiding second person (when reasonable), and explaining concepts in written text instead of relying on screenshots, all in an effort to better fit our content guidelines. I've also made changes to other parts of this documentation besides the section that you added.
Will you please review my changes to make sure I haven't altered the meaning of any of the explanations and left out anything that was technically necessary? Thanks!

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.

3 participants
0