Hi Suraj, All,
It makes sense to have roles of parties limited in time
But unfortunately adding from/thru dates to PartyRole would entail tremendous
changes as Nicolas and Adrian and Gil in OFBIZ-5959 mentioned.
We had this discussion so many times (with some variants and confusion: http://ofbiz.markmail.org/search/?q=PartyRole+PartyRelationship) that I feel
the need to come to a definitive consensual agreement and write a wiki page about it.
I remember asking myself about all that during a custom project and having
difficulties to take a decision by myself.
As you mentioned, I think the most interesting discussion is in OFBIZ-5959 and we could built on that before taking a consensual decision and writing
a wiki page. Maybe we will need a vote for that...
We definitively need a way to limit roles of parties in time, but then why not simply use contextual EntityNameRole entities as it was suggested in
OFBIZ-5959
About that, what do you think about my last comment at OFBIZ-5959:
https://s.apache.org/QXrl ?
Thanks
Jacques
Le 28/10/2017 à 10:25, Suraj Khurana a écrit :
Hi Scott,
Thanks for your response.
In figure-4 he <http://www.universaldatamodels.com/Portals/9/udm_Publication_Articles_11_05_Models_Patterns.pdf>__re
<http://www.universaldatamodels.com/Portals/9/udm_Publication_Articles_11_05_Models_Patterns.pdf>, it is specified that we do not need to manage
partyRole entity as party role is specific to something (like work effort) i.e. party does not have a dependency on party role for the role in any
entity.
IMO, we should have PartyRole entity so that it becomes easy to filter parties in specific roles, but, on the other hand, we should not maintain
this FK relationship while adding records to other entities like OrderRole, AdjustmentRole etc.
One use case could be like I mentioned earlier, it becomes easy to filter
parties in specific roles like suppliers, distributors etc.
--
Thanks and Regards
*Suraj Khurana***| Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
*HotWax Commerce* by *HotWax Systems*
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78, Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Scott Gray <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi Suraj,
I still haven't seen an example of a useful use case for adding
from/thruDate fields to the PartyRole table. Did you have anything in mind that
it might help with?
I'd honestly prefer to remove it rather than expand it.
Regards
Scott
On 29 September 2017 at 20:41, Suraj Khurana <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,
There has been already a discussion under OFBIZ-5959
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5959
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5959>> regarding this.
I would like to bring this point again into attention and would like to
suggest that we should introduce lifespan to all such entities.
Also, PartyRole FK constraint should be removed while adding a record of
that party in any other role entity, earlier it was also discussed that
it
becomes cumbersome to manage that and there is not any specific need to
have that in real time as well.
Let me know your thoughts on this.
--
Thanks and Regards
*Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
*HotWax Commerce* by *HotWax Systems*
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78, Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010
*Suraj Khurana***| Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
HotWax Commerce <http://www.hotwax.co/>by **HotWax Systems
<http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/>
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78, Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010
Cell phone: +91 96697-50002
<https://about.me/surajkhurana?promo=email_sig>
HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> recently received 8 mentions in /*The Gartner Digital Commerce Vendor Guide, 2016 */by Gartner, Inc.,
the world's leading IT research and advisory company.
Inline image 1
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Nicolas Malin <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Add lifespan to PartyRole seems to me just to complex perhaps impossible.
If you want indicate (as example) that a party is a customer from / to
with a lifespan on PartyRole they missing the information customer from who
?
PartyRole is a technical entity as functional entity (it's border line :)
). Prefer to manage this role lifespan information with
PartyRelationship and hidden PartyRole value to end user.
A party with "bill to customer" role associate to an order would be for the system
always a "bill to customer" and not only for the life order
time. But in the other case, you can consider that this "bill to customer"
is finish for your company and you can indicate this through
PartyRelationship
Nicolas
Le 29/09/2017 à 10:00, Scott Gray a écrit :
Hi Suraj,
I still haven't seen an example of a useful use case for adding
from/thruDate fields to the PartyRole table. Did you have anything in
mind
that it might help with?
I'd honestly prefer to remove it rather than expand it.
Regards
Scott
On 29 September 2017 at 20:41, Suraj Khurana <
[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,
There has been already a discussion under OFBIZ-5959
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5959
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5959>> regarding this.
I would like to bring this point again into attention and would
like to
suggest that we should introduce lifespan to all such entities.
Also, PartyRole FK constraint should be removed while adding a
record of
that party in any other role entity, earlier it was also discussed
that it
becomes cumbersome to manage that and there is not any specific
need to
have that in real time as well.
Let me know your thoughts on this.
--
Thanks and Regards
*Suraj Khurana* | Sr. Enterprise Software Engineer
*HotWax Commerce* by *HotWax Systems*
Plot no. 80, Scheme no. 78, Vijay Nagar, Indore, M.P. India 452010
