Jacques Le Roux commented on OFBIZ-9185:

Hi [~jacopoc]

While looking for history, I found your commit 
You then (2006) said:
bq. I've commented a few (broken) links from the find work effort screen and 
fixed the delete link that was pointing to a wrong request name; now deleting a 
workeffort is possible even if there are still some oddities in the way that 
page works (it's too complex to work fine and in fact it doesn't work well).

Would you agree that it's better to remove the deleteWorkEffort service and let 
people handle it their way?

> The deleteWorkEffort service is incomplete and even wrong
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: OFBIZ-9185
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9185
>             Project: OFBiz
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: workeffort
>    Affects Versions: Trunk
>            Reporter: Jacques Le Roux
>            Priority: Minor
> This issue is very old (pre Apache) so all versions are affected (I just 
> tested with R09.04)
> When you try to delete a Workeffort which has an established relationship 
> with a RuntimeData or any of the entities Workeffort has a relation with (eg 
> NoteData, RecurrenceInfo) using the the deleteWorkEffort service this one 
> fails
> Also from my experience CustRequestWorkEffort is missing in deleteWorkEffort, 
> would be to add
> {code}
> <remove-related value-field="lookedUpValue" 
> relation-name="CustRequestWorkEffort"/>
> {code}
> Besides (minor) ApplicationSandbox is maybe missing in the implementation of 
> deleteWorkEffort.
> There is indeed a workeffortId in ApplicationSandbox.
> So ApplicationSandbox is indirectly linked to Workeffort by RuntimeData.
> But it can anyway be deleted by a simple delete-by-and (or alike), so not a 
> problem for deleteWorkEffort, though this case could be handled there also.
> Summary: the deleteWorkEffort service  needs more work. The only solution I 
> see is to remove the FK from the Workeffort (ie put null in the related field 
> if it's not) and then deleted the related entity instead of directly calling 
> remove-related

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to