Re: Users - Company as Employer

Posted by David E. Jones on May 11, 2006; 3:26pm
URL: http://ofbiz.116.s1.nabble.com/Users-Company-as-Employer-tp139149p139157.html


Charles Johnson wrote:
> a. I take it that it's legitimate to leave Party 'Company' with that id
> and to alter its other attributes as appropriate?

Yes. Unless you are very familiar with OFBiz I wouldn't even recommend considering to try to build up a company config on your own. There are too many options and it is too easy to set it up to do something you don't want because you're not sure what an option is. It depends on the size of your deployment of course, as some companies really need to (or should...) know all options to avoid or solve problems over time and really get it working the way they want.

> b. Is it legitimate for 'Company' to have the role EMPLOYER, as opposed
> to that role being taken by a Person?

Any Party can have and RoleType associated with them, regardless of whether that Party is a Person or a PartyGroup. So yes, it is fine for the Company party (a PartyGroup) to have that role.

-David

 
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.ofbiz.org/mailman/listinfo/users