spike: Look at whether or not it's possible to sensibly add vcAttn to VendorContactModel

[david-silverink]

Request

In order for us to grant access to Semi-structured 'extras' field data, please provide the following information in this request:

Specification

• Project; Reapit.Services.Vendors
• Spike ticket for now to see if this is feasible
• Only prp.extra.vcAttn is relevant here. This can be either a numeric index of the selected staff member stored explicitly against the company contact record OR it can be a contact code, referencing a contact entity in the system
• In repo layer, once we've got our resultset back, identity any company vendors with vcAttn set to a contact code. Fetch all those contacts in a single query. For company vendors with vcAttn set to a number, we already have access to this information in the extras field. Build a method to set a new string property attention in VendorContactModel that is only set when type = company

Testing

• Test following scenarios:
  • Selected staff member is a contact that exists
  • Selected staff member is a contact that does not exist
  • Selected staff member is stored explicitly against the company record
  • When deleting a selected staff member that is stored against a company record, service should revert to the NEW contact that appears in the same position. Ensure we handle scenarios that could result in an IndexOutOfRangeException (ie where "2" is stored in vcAttn, but there's only one contact assigned to the company)
  • Be mindful of latency here - we should test this on a fairly sizeable dataset

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been updated and moved to our ‘Near Term’ column (typically completed within 0 - 4 months). We have assessed the effort required and outlined a technical specification - please take the time to review this detail. When we're ready to schedule the issue, it will be assigned to the relevant board where you can continue to track its progress to completion. For more information on our processes, please click here

[github-actions[bot]]

Whilst the nature of this request has been accepted, we are unable to commit to a specified sprint and therefore have assigned this issue to the ‘Long Term’ column (typically completed 9+ months). We will regularly review any issues and where development capacity is available, or work is aligned with our Roadmap, the issue will be updated. For more information on our processes, please click here