Re: deletePartyRelationship removes record and not set thruDate

[Jacopo Cappellato]

I also think it is fine to have low level services that do the CRUD operation; sometimes it may be useful to actually delete a record (even if there is an expiration date field); as David is suggesting, for the SFA I would use the update service or just create an expirePartyRelationship service and link it to the "Delete" button/link. I agree with Anil that keeping history of party relationships in the SFA application is a good thing.

Jacopo


On Jun 3, 2009, at 8:36 AM, David E Jones wrote:

-David


On Jun 3, 2009, at 12:13 AM, Anil Patel wrote:

Most of the lower level services named with "delete" do actually remove records. Usually the thruDate is set through the "update" service. What is shown in the UI is a totally different story... and there sometimes "Delete" buttons actually call an update service and just set a thruDate. The old ContactMech services are a bit of an exception to this, but the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.

Hi,






Regards
Anil Patel

deletePartyRelationship service defined in PartyServices.xml file between line 806 and 812 removes record from database. PartyRelationship entity has thruDate. When entity has such field I expect to expire record instead of removing it. Like in case of SFA, We create a Lead and then later a Lead is converted to Account. In lead conversion process I'll like to expire old PartyRelationship (of type LEAD_OWNER) and create new relationship of type ACCOUNT. This will preserve history. I am wondering if its ok to change implementation of deletePartyRelationship method. If no body has any objections I'll modify it to set thruDate instead of removing record.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature