[13.0][IMP] apriori: edi_oca -> edi - #4452
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Member
|
I don't know the history about this, so others are more suitable to judge this move. I see it weird, as AFAIK everything was moved to |
Contributor
Author
|
Yeah, in v14 was done the rename from edi to edi_oca. But later, when we made the backport to v12 we used v14 as reference, and we didn't change the module name. |
Member
|
Please @hbrunn can you confirm this is OK? |
hbrunn
approved these changes
Jun 10, 2024
hbrunn
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we need this indeed for migrating to v13, and then we'll have to rename it back for migrating to v14:
https://github.com/OCA/edi/tree/12.0/edi_oca
https://github.com/OCA/edi/tree/13.0/edi
https://github.com/OCA/edi/tree/14.0/edi_oca
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Was done in OCA/edi#877.
It was commented in #4384:
