[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5959?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14282619#comment-14282619
]
Adrian Crum commented on OFBIZ-5959:
------------------------------------
I believe my comment on the mailing list has been misunderstood. The point I
was making is this: In the PartyRelationship entity, the
partyRelationshipTypeId field is optional - because the "from" and "to" party
roles are enough to describe the party relationship. That conversation has
nothing to do with this issue.
I am not opposed to this issue, and my comments in it were merely meant to warn
everyone that this will be a big change.
I agree that the original intent of the PartyRole entity (as expressed in the
DMRB) has been lost, and currently the entity is being used in another way. The
current use of the entity is more like David Hay's XxxConstraint entities
(Enterprise Model Patterns) - where the fk relationships to PartyRole are used
to constrain how a party is related to various things. In practice, this fk
relationship becomes cumbersome, and I have suggested in the past that we
remove those fk relationships.
> Add lifespan fields to PartyRole
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: OFBIZ-5959
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-5959
> Project: OFBiz
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: party
> Affects Versions: Trunk
> Reporter: Pierre Smits
> Labels: role, roles
>
> Currently the assignments of roles to parties are boolean (there or not
> there).
> However, these role assignments also have a lifespan. This can be achieved by
> adding fromDate and thruDate fields.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
