add from/thrudat to workEffortContactMech

[Hans Bakker]

Concerning entity WorkEffortContactMech

in order to follow the same pattern of the entity PartyContectMech I
propose to add the field fromDate and add it to the primary key and add
the field thruDate to the WorkEffortContactMech.

We need this to show a mailinglist related to a project (svn updates)

This entity is hardly used so we do not intend to write a upgrade
service for it.

Regards,
Hans
--
http://www.antwebsystems.com :
Quality OFBiz support for competitive rates....

[Adrian Crum]

I would prefer that the Best Practices be followed consistently, and
that we avoid exceptions. How do you know the entity is hardly used?
Have you examined every OFBiz deployment?

-Adrian

Hans Bakker wrote:

> Concerning entity WorkEffortContactMech
>
> in order to follow the same pattern of the entity PartyContectMech I
> propose to add the field fromDate and add it to the primary key and add
> the field thruDate to the WorkEffortContactMech.
>
> We need this to show a mailinglist related to a project (svn updates)
>
> This entity is hardly used so we do not intend to write a upgrade
> service for it.
>
> Regards,
> Hans

[Scott Gray-2]

+1

Regards
Scott

On 21/10/2009, at 3:47 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:

> I would prefer that the Best Practices be followed consistently, and  
> that we avoid exceptions. How do you know the entity is hardly used?  
> Have you examined every OFBiz deployment?
>
> -Adrian
>
> Hans Bakker wrote:
>> Concerning entity WorkEffortContactMech
>> in order to follow the same pattern of the entity PartyContectMech I
>> propose to add the field fromDate and add it to the primary key and  
>> add
>> the field thruDate to the WorkEffortContactMech.
>> We need this to show a mailinglist related to a project (svn updates)
>> This entity is hardly used so we do not intend to write a upgrade
>> service for it.
>> Regards,
>> Hans

[Jacques Le Roux]

I agree, I made the same (bad) assumption with EmplLeave Entity in r826429 that I finally reverted because, among worse other
things, no upgrade service was provided.

Jacques

From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>

> +1
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 21/10/2009, at 3:47 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>
>> I would prefer that the Best Practices be followed consistently, and  that we avoid exceptions. How do you know the entity is
>> hardly used?  Have you examined every OFBiz deployment?
>>
>> -Adrian
>>
>> Hans Bakker wrote:
>>> Concerning entity WorkEffortContactMech
>>> in order to follow the same pattern of the entity PartyContectMech I
>>> propose to add the field fromDate and add it to the primary key and  add
>>> the field thruDate to the WorkEffortContactMech.
>>> We need this to show a mailinglist related to a project (svn updates)
>>> This entity is hardly used so we do not intend to write a upgrade
>>> service for it.
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans
>
>

[Tim Ruppert]

+1

Cheers,
Ruppert

On Oct 20, 2009, at 2:02 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> I agree, I made the same (bad) assumption with EmplLeave Entity in  
> r826429 that I finally reverted because, among worse other things,  
> no upgrade service was provided.
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Scott Gray" <[hidden email]>
>> +1
>>
>> Regards
>> Scott
>>
>> On 21/10/2009, at 3:47 AM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>
>>> I would prefer that the Best Practices be followed consistently,  
>>> and  that we avoid exceptions. How do you know the entity is  
>>> hardly used?  Have you examined every OFBiz deployment?
>>>
>>> -Adrian
>>>
>>> Hans Bakker wrote:
>>>> Concerning entity WorkEffortContactMech
>>>> in order to follow the same pattern of the entity  
>>>> PartyContectMech I
>>>> propose to add the field fromDate and add it to the primary key  
>>>> and  add
>>>> the field thruDate to the WorkEffortContactMech.
>>>> We need this to show a mailinglist related to a project (svn  
>>>> updates)
>>>> This entity is hardly used so we do not intend to write a upgrade
>>>> service for it.
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Hans
>>
>
>