Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Working with Hamza on #38

Hamza and I had our first voice session. We fixed several test cases for #38. One of the problems was that a lino.core.choicelists.Choice until now was callable:

>>> import lino
>>> lino.startup("lino.projects.min1.settings.demo")
>>> from lino.modlib.countries.choicelists import PlaceTypes
>>> PlaceTypes.province
<countries.PlaceTypes.province:21>
>>> callable(PlaceTypes.province)
True

Above snippet was True until today and will be False from now on.

This feature was used when specifying a given Choice instance as the default value of a ChoiceListField. Unfortunately Django 1.9 will deprecate callable values in a database query. So we decided to remove the __call__ method on Choice. And replace it by a new explicit method lino.core.choicelists.Choice.as_callable() which is now being called each time a ChoiceListField has a default value. We did not yet fully understand all the details of why this is necessary. It has to do with the fact that Django handles callable default values specially.

We also changed the sorting order of the items of

• lino.core.utils.models_by_base()

• lino.core.ddh.DisableDeleteHandler.fklist

Until now these lists were in a “natural” order (I guess the definition of their class objects). But this “natural” order is different between Django versions 1.6 and 1.8. Since anyway it doesn’t seem to have a big influence, we now sort them alphabetically.

Hamza continued to work on these while I slept. In the morning I merged his work into master:

$ git merge hamza/master
Updating db55135..72b3b4d
Fast-forward
 docs/tested/ddh.rst                   | 16 ++++++++--------
 lino/projects/min2/tests/test_min2.py |  6 +++---
 lino/utils/instantiator.py            |  5 +----
 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

Quitting Facebook

I am going to disappear now. At least for my Facebook friends.

Leaving Facebook is actually easy: How do I permanently delete my account?

Just for fun I also downloaded an archive of what they knew about me (or more precisely what they agreed to tell me they know). It is funny that even now they seem very serious about privacy:

“Caution: Protect your archive. Because this download may contain private information, you should keep it secure and take precautions when storing it, sending it or uploading it to another service.”

But actually the procedure was very correct and flawless. The only difficulty is that you must really know that you want it:

“Your account has been deactivated from the site and will be permanently deleted within 14 days. If you log into your account within the next 14 days, you will have the option to cancel your request.”

My problem with Facebook was not so much these privacy issues for which they got so famous. It is rather the fact that some of my friends stopped to use e-mail. Yes, I admit that Mark Zuckerberg and his servants have reached yet another milestone of their world domination project. But at least I won’t be there when they celebrate. I registered as number 41082 on http://www.quitfacebookday.com and just hope that some of my friends will continue to communicate with the old crazy idealist I am.

I recommend to not use Facebook because

• it is rather an imperium than a democratic organization

• it tries to keep you stupid and obedient instead of trying to make you learn how to move freely around

• every Facebook user is another buttress of this imperium

• everybody who is not on Facebook is a sign of hope that the we can manage to rule this world together without giving up our freedom.

EDIT:

• Jared Clarke also writes about why and how to quit Facebook: https://vpnandgo.com/delete-facebook-account/

• I did it without Facebook for two years, then reappeared because “having no Facebook account while continuing to have a Google account is even worse than having a FB account as well. Both Facebook and Google are huge powerful imperia, and every user is another buttress of their power. That’s a big problem because organizations of that size should be democratic and open instead of hierarchic and proprietary. But it’s also clear that I won’t save the world by keeping out of them…”

• And yet another guide that explains how to remove your data and account from Facebook https://www.wizcase.com/blog/delete-your-facebook-forever/

#38 (continued)

I adapted the test suites for Lino Welfare and Lino Noi after our changes of last night (Welfare had 8 trivial failures, Noi one).

#505 (continued)

I removed the field partner from Statement : we are not interested to identify the remote partner of every transaction.

Our demo XML file is now being imported by the lino_welfare.modlib.sepa.fixtures.demo fixture. I removed lino_welfare.tests.test_import_sepa because it had become useless. Advantage is that we can now have a “live” look at the imported demo data in the Eupen demo database.

Statement number differs depending on exchange format (SEPA or CODA)

I have a problem with the statement_number. Our demo data XML file (COD_20150907_O25MMF107I.xml) contains the following statement (I replaced parts of it by “…” for clarity):

<Stmt>
<Id>152500000475073/000001-000047</Id>
<CreDtTm>2015-09-03T00:00:00</CreDtTm>
<FrToDt>...</FrToDt>
<CpyDplctInd>DUPL</CpyDplctInd>
<Acct>...</Acct>
<Bal>...</Bal>
<Bal>...</Bal>
<TxsSummry>...</TxsSummry>
<Ntry>...</Ntry>
<Ntry>...</Ntry>
<Ntry>...</Ntry>
<Ntry>...</Ntry>
</Stmt>

The statement ID using SEPA is “152500000475073/000001-000047”. This is what Lino displays correctly.

The same statement, when imported using CODA into TIM, has a number “2015/021”. But I cannot find that number anywhere in our XML file. The users would prefer to see that old-style “2015/021” also in Lino, if possible.

According to the Coded statement of account (CODA) (page 17), a CODA movement contains:

• A Continuous sequence number which “starts at 0001 and is increased by 1 for each movement record referring to another movement on th e daily statement of account. If there are more than 9,999 transactions, the number goes up to 0000 and then 0001.”

• A Detail number which “starts at 0000 and is increased by 1 for each movement record for the same continuous sequence num ber. If there are more than 9,999 details relating to one single transaction, the number goes up to 0000 and then 0001”

• A Reference number of the bank which “is purely informative” and has 21 characters.

Does the bank really identify their statements differently depending on which method is being used for exchange!? Did I miss something?