On 2017-09-27 08:25, Jon Levy wrote: > On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 2:35:10 AM UTC-4, Cédric Krier wrote: > > > We could not use 'readonly' attribute because it is not yet an enforced > > constraint [1]. > So it sounds like the overloading the write method was just to enforce > readonly. Are you aware of anything that would break by lifting this > constraint (either by using my own version of the address module, or > by monkeypatching)?
Yes almost all modules: sale, purchase, invoice, stock, project etc. > > I really think that you should use the party_relationship module and > > never use an address as a party. > > Companies are made up of individuals. This is a real-world concept > that Tryton should embrace modeling it (when appropriate to a given > deployment). I don't love party_communication, but think it is better > than party_relationship for our needs. And Tryton does with the module party_relationship following the best practice from https://www.amazon.com/Data-Model-Resource-Book-Vol/dp/0471380237 Using addresses to modeling employees is so wrong because well an address is a location [1] and it does not change in contrary of an employee who can change of company or even work for two companies at the same time. So I doubt "party_communication" is better for your needs because you need to break Tryton for that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Address_(geography) -- Cédric Krier - B2CK SPRL Email/Jabber: [email protected] Tel: +32 472 54 46 59 Website: http://www.b2ck.com/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tryton" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tryton/20170927154853.GE3626%40kei.
