[WIP] Add repair order support to ReturnOrder model (Phase 1: Backend)

[sanrishi]

Description

This PR adds repair order capabilities to the existing ReturnOrder model, enabling users to track repair work on customer-returned items.

This is Phase 1 — Backend models and API only. Frontend UI components will follow in a separate PR.

Closes #12064

Changes

New fields on \ReturnOrder\

• \ echnician\ (ForeignKey → User) — who performs the repair
• \is_repair\ (Boolean) — toggle to mark order as a repair job

New fields on \ReturnOrderLineItem\

• \symptom\ (TextField) — customer-reported issue
• 
  epair_description\ (TextField) — description of work performed

New status codes

• \AWAITING_PARTS\ (27, \Warning) — waiting for parts to arrive
• \READY_FOR_PICKUP\ (35, \Info) — repaired, ready to return to customer

New model methods

• \�wait_parts_order()\ — transition to AWAITING_PARTS
• \mark_ready()\ — transition to READY_FOR_PICKUP

New API endpoints

• \order/ro//await-parts/\
• \order/ro//mark-ready/\

Status transition updates

• \can_hold, \can_issue, _action_complete\ all updated to handle new statuses
• \READY_FOR_PICKUP\ added to \COMPLETE\ group
• \AWAITING_PARTS\ added to \OPEN\ group

Files Changed

File	Lines
\order/status_codes.py\	+13
\order/models.py\	+72
\order/serializers.py\	+25
\order/api.py\	+22
\order/migrations/0121_return_order_repair_fields.py\	+56

Total: ~190 lines

Future Phases

• Phase 2: Frontend UI updates — add technician, is_repair, symptom, repair_description fields to forms and detail pages
• Phase 3: Optional — separate RepairOrder model if warranted

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for inventree-web-pui-preview canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	1b18347
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/inventree-web-pui-preview/deploys/6a233187fbd14800083845f1

[sanrishi]

@SchrodingersGat Let me know what i need to address more?

[matmair]

@sanrishi just to make sure you are aware: the bounty for #12064 has been assigned, you will not be eligible to receive it

[sanrishi]

@matmair Thanks for clarification! but i am interested to work on this! can i work on this? will solve the issue efficiently!

[sanrishi]

@matmair Could you assign me later if aditya not able to complete? i think his pr is staled with unusual changes?

[matmair]

@sanrishi the target requirements are not even clear right now. I don’t know how you or anyone else thinks you will address requirements that have not been fully agreed upon

[matmair]

@sanrishi you are flirting with a org-wide block with this behaviour

[sanrishi]

@matmair sorry for that behaviour, but I have a robust implementation approach ready to tackle this, could you assign it to me?

[matmair]

no - see above;
this was strike 2 - strike 3 you get a ban and a name-and-shame

[matmair]

This is not a full implementation; this does not pass QC checks due to a missing api_version bump amongst other basic things mentioned in the contribution guidelines

[sanrishi]

@matmair thanks for the review and genuinely sorry for my previous behaviour, I am not going to ask you for assignment, I will complete this pr as you requested changes and then you can decide if I am eligible

Thanks 🙏