-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 166
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
sale_margin_security: Don't depend on product cost security #222
Comments
If you know the sale price and the margin, you know the cost... All you have to do is a simple multiplication. And vice-versa: if you know the cost and the sale price, with simple math you get the margin. So, IIUC, both things are the same, and that's why it was refactored for simplification. |
Yes, but some companies want to split the access rights to explicit margin fields visibility (there are buyers and salesmen). Of course, people can compute it but they will need to do the exercise. Restablishing the previous behavior will allow to be flexible and do both scenarios. |
... and they'll do it. Trust me, it happened. I'm sorry to say this, but I disagree with this proposal. 😅 These modules are labeled "security" for a reason. Restoring the previous behavior would be useful only to reduce security and UX. You would install the modules, but you would have an option to only get a placebo-like sense of security regarding cost information. It'd be a step backwards. If you still need to do that, I suggest that you do it in a separate module that depends on these ones. I don't think this behavior should be supported by the base ones. |
I don't really want to restore previous behavior:
|
@jdidderen @jdidderen-nsi As you did the migration for v17 What do you think ? |
People that have access to cost fields should not have access necessarily to sale margin ones.
We should restore the previous implementation.
Due to : #198
@yajo @rafaelbn @lmignon @phschmidt
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: