2013/10/9 LAG Robin Baumgartner <[email protected]>: > You're not alone with this requirement. In fact, we have already > developed a very similar module called party_relationship[1]. > > Looking at your blueprint, it seems to be very close to our > implementation. Maybe you want to use that as a base? Improvements are > welcome of course.
We also have the same kind of implementation [1]. We used to have from the party relation type a link to the reversed relation type, but after a while we removed it. There is only one relation type between two parties, only the name differs from which side you see the relation. This implementation works fine for us and seems pretty simple. [1] http://pastebin.com/NckykimD -- Romain Séon Coopengo
