[10.0][ADD] Return also state label (not only technical value)

[acsonefho]

Depends on MR #407
(Please review first depending MR to avoid comment code related to others MR)

Currently we return (into json result) the state (technical value) of the object (cart and invoice for this case). But we also have to return the translated label of this state (as the front doesn't have to manage translation on data).

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #404 into 10.0 will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 85.71%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             10.0     #404      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   89.49%   89.49%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files         141      141              
  Lines        3684     3685       +1     
==========================================
+ Hits         3297     3298       +1     
  Misses        387      387

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
shopinvader_invoice/services/invoice.py	100% <ø> (+3.03%)	⬆️
shopinvader/services/abstract_sale.py	97.61% <100%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
shopinvader/services/service.py	77.9% <83.33%> (+0.4%)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 43201c5...feddf0c. Read the comment docs.

[Cedric-Pigeon]

@acsonefho Could you resolve conflicts please?

[acsonefho]

@Cedric-Pigeon It's done :) But this MR depends on #407 (also in conflict) but who is waiting a feed back from @sebastienbeau . So I let this MR in WIP.

[rousseldenis]

@acsonefho What's the status of this ?

[acsonefho]

@acsonefho What's the status of this ?

Wait for reviewers and then merge :)

[rousseldenis]

Code review.

Ok, but I'm in favor of a more generic mechanism that allow to return a tuple or ... in the json for all fields translate = True

[simahawk]

Code review.

Ok, but I'm in favor of a more generic mechanism that allow to return a tuple or ... in the json for all fields translate = True

I agree. We could have something in base_jsonify to ask for value/label in the parser.
Eg: {"value": "foo", "label": "Foo"}.
If you like the idea it would make sense to change state + state_label w/ a dictionary already.

[acsonefho]

Code review.
Ok, but I'm in favor of a more generic mechanism that allow to return a tuple or ... in the json for all fields translate = True

I agree. We could have something in base_jsonify to ask for value/label in the parser.
Eg: {"value": "foo", "label": "Foo"}.
If you like the idea it would make sense to change state + state_label w/ a dictionary already.

It's a great idea!! But what about compatibility with front side who already use the state key?
Do we have to keep both for while?

[simahawk]

@acsonefho that's an option, yes. If you go with it add TODO to drop it.
In any case, if you want to use the label you will have to touch the frontend -> better you use the new format.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

This PR has the approved label and has been created more than 5 days ago. It should therefore be ready to merge by a maintainer (or a PSC member if the concerned addon has no declared maintainer). 🤖

[Cedric-Pigeon]

/ocabot merge patch

[shopinvader-git-bot]

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 10.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 10.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 10.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 10.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

@Cedric-Pigeon your merge command was aborted due to failed check(s), which you can inspect on this commit of 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch.

After fixing the problem, you can re-issue a merge command. Please refrain from merging manually as it will most probably make the target branch red.

[Cedric-Pigeon]

/ocabot merge patch

[shopinvader-git-bot]

This PR looks fantastic, let's merge it!
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 10.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

It looks like something changed on 10.0 in the meantime.
Let me try again (no action is required from you).
Prepared branch 10.0-ocabot-merge-pr-404-by-Cedric-Pigeon-bump-patch, awaiting test results.

[shopinvader-git-bot]

Congratulations, your PR was merged at 9dba638. Thanks a lot for contributing to shopinvader. ❤️