Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
The current plan is to not do this as a separate type of "records" system.
Instead, we are creating a "data maintainer" pseudo-party that can update the
data via the documents accessed via reports when the user has appropriate
permissions. With data updating allowed, users can fix bad data when
necessary, but also can use a transaction much like a record, updating the
values and saving them as needed. This will reduce the need for multiple
reports (one for transactions and one for records) as well as the additional
special setup for record types, records, special documents for managing
records, etc.
This will also allow for "live" document viewing so that a user can see the
documents "live" (rather than just snapshots of previously completed parties),
as well as the ability to update those documents when necessary.
Original comment by yoz...@gmail.com
on 12 Aug 2014 at 9:46
Added VIEW and UPDATE permissions to report templates that specify who is given
access to "live transactions" without using a traditional party pickup. By
default, all such access will provide "view only optional" party access using
the pre-defined esf_reports_access party. Documents and packages may define
this party specifically to allow for update access or to change what appears in
a document when coming in via the reports. The esf_reports_access party is not
a traditional party in that it will never take part in the workflow, and can
update transactions that are canceled or completed. When the
esf_reports_access party has been defined in a package, its definition will
limit the documents allowed to be accessed (as well as further restricted if
the report template itself limits which documents can be accessed), but the
party will remain in a "completed" status, with the snapshots showing only the
latest version of changes should they be done.
Original comment by yoz...@gmail.com
on 11 Sep 2014 at 11:46
Added to the 14.9.27 release.
Original comment by yoz...@gmail.com
on 26 Sep 2014 at 12:03
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
yoz...@gmail.com
on 2 Jul 2014 at 6:49