Hello Deepak,

Nice Idea ! Thanks !

I think that we could have a new entity-auto invoke type, kind of "update-immutable" to manage the immutable case.

Then for the specific but existing need of PostalAddress fix (we met the need to fix a postalAddress without creating a new instance), we could use the basic invoce "update", with a serviceName (fixPostalAddress), with appropriate documentation for newcomers.

Regards,

Gil

On 24/02/2018 07:14, Deepak Dixit wrote:
Yes it may confuse but I think its correct, the basic rule is if you want
to update postal address (ContactMech) it will expire old one and create
new one with update. So Ideally PostalAddress is an immutable object where
you can;t do modification in it.

if you want to update you need to clone it and do update.

I think we can add this in entity auto engine so that it will be part of
entity auto framework.

Thanks & Regards
--
Deepak Dixit
www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 8:11 PM, gil portenseigne <
gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:

Hello,

While working on a new contactMech type (no spoiler yet, that will come in
some days ;)), I wanted to develop the CRUD services , and stumbled upon
something that bother me.

Actually, when we update a contactMech in OFBiz, the service keep history
of it, to keep reference for related entity (like communicationEvent and
such). Thanks to that, old communication event/invoice/etc. refer to the
old contact mechanism.

That's fine with me, but what is bothering me is that updatePostalAddress
(and others) service is named like every auto-entity CRUD services within
OFBiz, that could be misleading for newcomers

I feel like we have to change the naming of these services. No good idea
yet about a new name... Am I the only one wondering about that ? Is that
fine to keep "udpate" in this context ?

WDYT ?

Gil


--
logoNrd <http://nereide.fr/>
         Gil PORTENSEIGNE
Intégrateur Apache-OFBiz, ERP en logiciel Libre
informat...@nereide.fr
8 rue des Déportés 37000 TOURS
02 47 50 30 54

| Réseau Libre Entreprise <http://www.libre-entreprise.org/>



Reply via email to