Hi Rishi, All, The agreement entity caters for capturing the principal two parties and their appropriate roles. This caters for the majority of the agreements struck between the representatives of the internal (accounting) organisation and their business partners.
The use case you presented (one agreement between the internal organisation and multiple supplier parties to pay those suppliers a fee based on sales) is, IMO,: 1. unlikely to happen. Any such agreement can be broken up into unique contracts between the internal organisation and each supplier, with each having their unique conditions. Besides, who would willingly agree to having the same conditions as its competitors. Each principal party aims to get the best deal for itself. 2. needlessly complex to maintain. When the agreement is the precursor to the legal document (i.e. through the pdf) such would only be valid if and when the document is signed by all principal parties involved. And as a follow-up a copy of that signed document retained through the context object associated with the agreement. I would say that, given the (potential) adopter audience, multi-principles agreements are currently not the first thing on their mind in their process to vet OFBiz for their business.But I may be mistaken, and there are multiple (existing) adopters out there that work with such contracts. I would love to hear from them. In most cases, the AgreementRoles associated with an agreement are the persons (of the internal organisation) involved in reviewing, viewing and approving the contract, and the persons (contacts in various roles) of the opposing party Best regards, Pierre Smits *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without privileges) since 2008* Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:10 AM Rishi Solanki <rishisolan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Pierre, > Few inputs for thoughts; > > One agreement from company to multiple parties may exists. For example; > From Company if sale is more than $10,000 then company may credit/discount > 10% of sale to its suppliers. Then it will be applicable to more than one > supplier, then AgreementRole entity is suitable in that case. > > To be clarify I'm not against this proposal because other entities in the > list are good candidate for this. Also following common pattern is good > reason to go with this, may be we can add or filter some entities. > > But I will be able to say yes/no for the proposal after some more inputs > come from community. > > Best Regards, > -- > *Rishi Solanki* | Sr Manager, Enterprise Software Development > HotWax Systems <http://www.hotwaxsystems.com/> > Linkedin: *Rishi Solanki* > <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rishi-solanki-62271b7/> > Direct: +91-9893287847 > > > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:11 PM Pierre Smits <pierresm...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Hi All, > > > > Currently several entities capture the (contractual) parties in fields > like > > fromPartyId and toPartyId. These parties commonly represent the internal > > (accounting) organisation and the external party (the customer, supplier, > > contact, account, carrier etc). > > > > Such entities are: > > > > - Agreement (in party) > > - Employment (in humanres) > > - Invoice (in accounting > > - OrderReportPurchasesGroupByProduct > > - PartyBenefit (in humanres) > > - Payment (in accounting) > > - PayHistory (in humanres) > > - ReturnHeader (in Order) > > - UnemploymentClaim (in humanres > > > > > > However there are a (quite a) few entities that defy these 1-on-1 > > relationships (between internal party and the object, and the external > > party and the object), like: > > > > - OrderHeader: neither partyIdFrom nor partyIdTo > > - Quote: neither partyIdFrom nor partyIdTo but having a partyId field > > - CustRequest: only having fromPartyid (plus its role > > - Subscription: having originatedFromPartyId (plus the role) and > partyId > > - ReorderGuideline: having partyId (plus the role) > > > > And I am confident I am missing a few. > > > > In oder to simplify processes for capturing the main parties in various > > entity records I propose to realign these (master) entities to ensure > that > > both the primary internal and external parties (and their primary roles) > > are captured. > > > > What are your thoughts? > > > > Best regards, > > > > Pierre Smits > > > > *Apache Trafodion <https://trafodion.apache.org>, Vice President* > > *Apache Directory <https://directory.apache.org>, PMC Member* > > Apache Incubator <https://incubator.apache.org>, committer > > *Apache OFBiz <https://ofbiz.apache.org>, contributor (without > privileges) > > since 2008* > > Apache Steve <https://steve.apache.org>, committer > > >
