Le 13/11/2021 à 19:26, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Jacopo made an interesting comment at: https://s.apache.org/6s8lr that:
<<There are pros and cons, or rather scenarios that are facilitated by one
approach and made more difficult by the other, to both ways of
interpreting PartyRole records.
The current approach, implemented in many ootb applications, as Michael
Brohl has pointed out, is to interpret the PartyRole records as all the
roles the party actually plays.
The other approach, that is the one advocated by Pierre Smits, is to interpret the PartyRole records as the roles the party can play.>>
Hi Jacopo, All,
Thinking about it, is there not a contradiction between Michael's vision (actually also how it was also historically envisioned by the founders) and
the fact that we are able to create/edit PartyRoles in party component?
Hence the creation of OFBIZ-5980 "Have the ability to revoke (expire) roles of a party", OFBIZ-12370 "InvoiceRole: impossible combination of party and
role selectable: leads to error" and all related issues,
It seems to me that OFBIZ-5827 "Have party selection in screens based on relation(s)
in stead of role" and all related issues fits more.
Note that all is Pierre's work. That's the Gordian node I speak about. I think we have already almost decided how to cut it: OFBIZ-5827 way rather
than OFBIZ-5980 one.
So we should tackle OFBIZ-5827 and all related issues and close OFBIZ-5980 and
all related issue after carefully reviewing them
Nobody objects?
Jacques
