[Spce-user] Reseller/Customer data from 2.8 to 3.0

[Andreas Granig]

Hi,

On 11/05/2013 01:01 PM, Gavin Sweet wrote:
> Firstly, moving to v3.0, the Reseller link becomes explicit. I assume
> that when upgrading from 2.8 to 3.0, the Reseller in most cases would
> simply set to “Default”?

Right. There is a db script which assigns a default contact to each 
contract, and this contact is assigned to the default reseller.

> If I want to update the relationship between a contract/customer and a
> reseller, is it ONLY the billing.reseller table that needs to be updated?

A customer (which is in fact a billing.contracts entry) is related to a 
reseller via the billing.contacts.reseller_id table.

> Secondly, although the concept of a Customer is shown in the GUI, it
> doesn’t look like its fully activated, and Customer name for instance
> isn’t available - is that just for the Pro version?

Again, a Customer is really just a billing.contracts entry. It is not 
related to the billing.customers table, which is unused and will be 
removed in an upcoming cleanup attempt.

The reason for the visual separation of customer contracts, reseller 
contracts and peering contracts (all living in billing.contracts) is 
just to make administration for the operator easier.

So for a Customer (aka contract aka account in 2.x), there is not much 
to show. This has been quite an annoyance in the 2.x versions, where you 
created a customer contract (an account), and if you didn't create a 
subscriber in it, it was impossible to find this contract anymore, 
unless you remembered the ID.

So what we did in 3.x is to enforce a contact for a contract, where you 
have to fill in at least the email address, so you have something to 
search for and to display.

> In the GUI we get things like “Customer Details for #11 ()” rather than
> being able to add a name.

This is actually a visual glitch. In the upcoming 3.1 release, there 
will be another change in how customer contracts are handled. Each 
customer is bound to a product, and the product is supposed to be shown 
in the "()". This slipped into the template during a 3.0 back-port.

> In the billing.contracts table there is a link to customer_id which is
> always set to null by the looks of it, and this links to the
> billing.customers table which is not populated.

This is not used at all. It's some legacy table from the 1.x times.

> Again, is that going to be made available in SPCE or only in pro?
>
> If I write my own code to populate the link to a customer_id and to
> complete the customer table, will it break anything else?

You probably don't want/need to touch this at all. So it really depends 
on what exactly you're trying to accomplish.

Andreas