I agree this is the right way to do it. On Friday, December 28, 2012 2:03:13 AM UTC-5, Massimo Di Pierro wrote: > > If we allow setting is_active from False to True we would be able to > re-cycle the record and there would be a record of the recycling (who > deleted it, who restored it, and when). > > If we clone a deleted record we break references to it and it would be > hard to track the consequences of the restoration. > > Massimo > > On Friday, 28 December 2012 00:19:54 UTC-6, Mandar Vaze wrote: >> >> >> >>> You should be able to clone a deleted record however. >> >> >> I agree. An ability to "clone" the deleted record would be great. I >> assume no such feature exists (correct ? I didn't find any) >> >> If you are just using your auditing log like a recycle bin, then please >>> name it as such. >>> >> >> Minor nitpick - Current behavior isn't EXACTLY like a recycle >> bin. Recycle Bin indicates an object has gone FROM one location to recycle >> bin. But in this case, the older copy of record is copied to archive table >> and record itself is MODIFIED (is_active=False) >> >> In any case, you can count this as a vote for not allowing undeletes by >>> changing the is_active flag. >>> >> >> I'm OK with this as well. >> >> -Mandar >> >
--
