Hi,
I am following the createEmployee flow of partymgr and trying to establish where the partyTypeId is set to 'PERSON'. I am looking to change that to a sub type called 'EMPLOYEE' that I have created. I could figure out how alternative flow for 'PARTY_GROUP' is set , but unclear on how 'PERSON' is set. Would really appreciate pointers. - Arays |
Alight! Was able to dig it up in the line below
Map<String, Object> newPartyMap = UtilMisc.toMap("partyId", partyId, "partyTypeId", "PERSON", "description", description, "createdDate", now, "lastModifiedDate", now, "statusId", statusId); From what it looks like this is hardwired to "PERSON". I am guessing there must be a reason behind it and perhaps it is best left that way. So for my requirement thinking the simplest way is perhaps to just use roles for now. Still have to worry about broken workflows if someone where to change the roles downstream . Any suggestions? - Arays
|
In reply to this post by aray
Alight! Was able to dig it up in the line below
Map<String, Object> newPartyMap = UtilMisc.toMap("partyId", partyId, "partyTypeId", "PERSON", "description", description, "createdDate", now, "lastModifiedDate", now, "statusId", statusId); From what it looks like this is hardwired to "PERSON". I am guessing there must be a reason behind it and perhaps it is best left that way. So for my requirement thinking the simplest way is perhaps to just use roles for now. Still have to worry about broken workflows if someone where to change the roles downstream . Any suggestions? - Arays
|
In reply to this post by aray
Employee is a party role, not a party type.
It would be less work for you to use the existing functionality. -Adrian ARays wrote: > Hi, > > I am following the createEmployee flow of partymgr and trying to establish > where the partyTypeId is set to 'PERSON'. I am looking to change that to a > sub type called 'EMPLOYEE' that I have created. I could figure out how > alternative flow for 'PARTY_GROUP' is set , but unclear on how 'PERSON' is > set. Would really appreciate pointers. > > - Arays |
Thanks Adrian. I figured it would be easier to stick to using 'Role' than PartyType to limit the number of changes and be reasonably close to the trunk codebase. I would have liked a way to fix a role that can't be changed or dropped (essentially achieving the same effect as my original intent of picking a partyType) and my next steps would be to try and fix that sort of thing.
- Arays
|
Hi Arays,
Following Book will help you. 'Chapter 2 - People and Organization' is specially for Party. The Data Model Resource Book, Vol. 1: A Library of Universal Data Models for All Enterprises (Paperback) by Len Silverston <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/ref=ntt_athr_dp_sr_1?%5Fencoding=UTF8&sort=relevancerank&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=Len%20Silverston> Regards -- Chirag Manocha HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd. Website :- www.hotwaxmedia.com Contact :- +91-98263-19099 ARays wrote: > Thanks Adrian. I figured it would be easier to stick to using 'Role' than > PartyType to limit the number of changes and be reasonably close to the > trunk codebase. I would have liked a way to fix a role that can't be changed > or dropped (essentially achieving the same effect as my original intent of > picking a partyType) and my next steps would be to try and fix that sort of > thing. > > - Arays > > > Adrian Crum wrote: > >> Employee is a party role, not a party type. >> >> It would be less work for you to use the existing functionality. >> >> -Adrian >> >> ARays wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am following the createEmployee flow of partymgr and trying to >>> establish >>> where the partyTypeId is set to 'PERSON'. I am looking to change that to >>> a >>> sub type called 'EMPLOYEE' that I have created. I could figure out how >>> alternative flow for 'PARTY_GROUP' is set , but unclear on how 'PERSON' >>> is >>> set. Would really appreciate pointers. >>> >>> - Arays >>> >> > > |
In reply to this post by aray
What you might want to do is create a SECA that is triggered on
PartyRole update. If the change isn't allowed, then return an error or failure. -Adrian ARays wrote: > Thanks Adrian. I figured it would be easier to stick to using 'Role' than > PartyType to limit the number of changes and be reasonably close to the > trunk codebase. I would have liked a way to fix a role that can't be changed > or dropped (essentially achieving the same effect as my original intent of > picking a partyType) and my next steps would be to try and fix that sort of > thing. > > - Arays > > > Adrian Crum wrote: >> Employee is a party role, not a party type. >> >> It would be less work for you to use the existing functionality. >> >> -Adrian >> >> ARays wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am following the createEmployee flow of partymgr and trying to >>> establish >>> where the partyTypeId is set to 'PERSON'. I am looking to change that to >>> a >>> sub type called 'EMPLOYEE' that I have created. I could figure out how >>> alternative flow for 'PARTY_GROUP' is set , but unclear on how 'PERSON' >>> is >>> set. Would really appreciate pointers. >>> >>> - Arays >> > |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |