Uploaded image for project: 'OFBiz'
  1. OFBiz
  2. OFBIZ-3480

party id cannot be specified through GUI while creating a Party (Person or Party Group)

    Details

    • Type: Improvement
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Minor
    • Resolution: Implemented
    • Affects Version/s: Trunk
    • Fix Version/s: 16.11.01
    • Component/s: party
    • Labels:
      None
    • Sprint:
      Bug Crush Event - 21/2/2015

      Description

      see the message in context: http://n4.nabble.com/Party-ID-during-creation-tt1554713.html#a1554713

      1. While creating an organization, it is possible to specify a meaningful party id through ofbiz setup.
      2. But, it is NOT possible to specify the party id through GUI while creating a Party (Person or Party Group). this means, all the parties created get a sequence id for party id.

      Bilgin Ibryam's replay is posted below.

      The PK field in party creation service is validated for special
      characters and so on. So the user is actually allowed to try with
      random text.
      I think this field is simply missing in the UI. That's why you are not
      "allowed" to enter the id.
      In addition to this, ofbiz display Ids in most of the forms ( and all
      the lookup fields). So it is very important to allow users to enter
      meaningful Ids, especially for data that it used for long period like
      partyId, facailityId, fixedAssetId, agreementId... So create forms
      should have an optional Id field (partyId, facilityId...) with a label
      saying that if an Id is not specified, the system will generate one.

      1. OFBIZ-3480.patch
        5 kB
        Taher Alkhateeb

        Activity

        Hide
        lektran Scott Gray added a comment -

        Changed from Bug to Improvement since I'm quite sure this was done intentional at the time (why I'm not sure) and priority from Critical to Minor.

        Show
        lektran Scott Gray added a comment - Changed from Bug to Improvement since I'm quite sure this was done intentional at the time (why I'm not sure) and priority from Critical to Minor.
        Hide
        crc1021 Eric Lofstad added a comment -

        I've been evaluating ofbiz, and also found this to be an issue. So I'm very interested to hear any response.

        Having a meaningful value for party_id would be very helpful especially since most forms only show party_id and not any name. After entering information for a communication, order, etc, the forms only show a party of "11007" (for example). There is no quick way to visually check you have the correct party unless you happen to have all the numbers memorized.

        Also, some fields have auto-complete capability, but that is not a useful option for party_id fields if they are all numeric.

        Show
        crc1021 Eric Lofstad added a comment - I've been evaluating ofbiz, and also found this to be an issue. So I'm very interested to hear any response. Having a meaningful value for party_id would be very helpful especially since most forms only show party_id and not any name. After entering information for a communication, order, etc, the forms only show a party of "11007" (for example). There is no quick way to visually check you have the correct party unless you happen to have all the numbers memorized. Also, some fields have auto-complete capability, but that is not a useful option for party_id fields if they are all numeric.
        Hide
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

        from http://markmail.org/message/rgl2d43digc3rpcz I guess a patch would get some interest

        Show
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - from http://markmail.org/message/rgl2d43digc3rpcz I guess a patch would get some interest
        Hide
        taher Taher Alkhateeb added a comment -

        I am attaching a patch which applies the feature requested. If the user inputs a party ID to any of the party creation screens (person, party group, customer, employee or prospect) then that ID will be used, otherwise it will pull a party ID from the sequence bank

        Show
        taher Taher Alkhateeb added a comment - I am attaching a patch which applies the feature requested. If the user inputs a party ID to any of the party creation screens (person, party group, customer, employee or prospect) then that ID will be used, otherwise it will pull a party ID from the sequence bank
        Hide
        taher Taher Alkhateeb added a comment -

        Bump, please apply the patch or review the issue.

        Show
        taher Taher Alkhateeb added a comment - Bump, please apply the patch or review the issue.
        Hide
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

        Thanks Babu, Taher,

        Taher your patch is in trunk at revision: 1666794

        Show
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - Thanks Babu, Taher, Taher your patch is in trunk at revision: 1666794
        Hide
        pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

        I find this a rather fast track implementation. I am sure that the patch Taher provided is delivering on the technical promise, but is the use case sufficient to have it into to OFBiz? Are we certain there are no considerations we are overlooking?

        Scott already pointed out that there was a reason why users couldn't provide their version of the party id in the creation screens. Having it for an initial setup is a totally different use case, than providing it in end user functionality for the general user group.

        I regard the arguments provided by Eric back in 2010 as not enough to implement the patch. If screens in other applications only present a party ID as the 'meaningfull info' about the party, the screens in those applications should be improved....

        Show
        pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - I find this a rather fast track implementation. I am sure that the patch Taher provided is delivering on the technical promise, but is the use case sufficient to have it into to OFBiz? Are we certain there are no considerations we are overlooking? Scott already pointed out that there was a reason why users couldn't provide their version of the party id in the creation screens. Having it for an initial setup is a totally different use case, than providing it in end user functionality for the general user group. I regard the arguments provided by Eric back in 2010 as not enough to implement the patch. If screens in other applications only present a party ID as the 'meaningfull info' about the party, the screens in those applications should be improved....
        Hide
        taher Taher Alkhateeb added a comment -

        Hi Pierre,

        I am neutral as to whether the patch should be applied and just trying to cleanup some old JIRAs. You can revert the commit if you wish either way it is one less ticket lurking for years.

        Show
        taher Taher Alkhateeb added a comment - Hi Pierre, I am neutral as to whether the patch should be applied and just trying to cleanup some old JIRAs. You can revert the commit if you wish either way it is one less ticket lurking for years.
        Hide
        pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment -

        Hi Taher,

        I agree, lurking tickets should be addressed. I didn't have the time yesterday or today to review the patch, but was planning to before or on the Community Bug day coming Saturday. Was wondering though when you presented the patch, whether it was indeed out of need or out of willingness to help.

        Anyway, thanks for work you have done.

        Best regards,

        Pierre

        Show
        pfm.smits Pierre Smits added a comment - Hi Taher, I agree, lurking tickets should be addressed. I didn't have the time yesterday or today to review the patch, but was planning to before or on the Community Bug day coming Saturday. Was wondering though when you presented the patch, whether it was indeed out of need or out of willingness to help. Anyway, thanks for work you have done. Best regards, Pierre
        Hide
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment -

        I consider users should know what they are doing, if they don't want to set the partyId then they just have to let it empty. If for a reason they prefer to have then named then why not? It's a matter of (custom) project policy and OFBiz should let open the opportunity.

        The comment "ID sequence will be generated if empty" should be enough

        Show
        jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux added a comment - I consider users should know what they are doing, if they don't want to set the partyId then they just have to let it empty. If for a reason they prefer to have then named then why not? It's a matter of (custom) project policy and OFBiz should let open the opportunity. The comment "ID sequence will be generated if empty" should be enough

          People

          • Assignee:
            jacques.le.roux Jacques Le Roux
            Reporter:
            bsreekanth Babu Sreekanth
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            2 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved:

              Development

                Agile