Dealing with suspended Merchants

summary.txt

# Dealing with suspended Merchants and Employees

We need just one, maybe two decisions:

(1) When somebody activates the _employees_ feature toggle in the BO, should the
    system create {Employee}s for suspended {Merchant}s? Yes or No?
    **Notes**
    (a) I want to make it clear that all {Employee}s are shown in the table in
        the backend - no exceptions. This can not be changed.
    (b) The assigned {Employee}s' assigned {Merchant}s are already filtered,
        meaning that a suspsend {Merchant} is NEVER shown as one of the assigned
        {Merchant}s. 
(2) Suppose the _employees_ feature toggle is already activated and somebody
    suspends one of the {Organization}'s {Merchant}s. What should happen?

@annet Let's do the following:

(1) Yes. Why? It's already implemented. Also the alternative would be far more
    complicated. It's true, that deleting {Employee}s who are in fact assigned
    to suspended {Merchant}s can fail in unexpected ways at the moment (i.e. you
    can't a {Merchant}'s last {Resource} even if this {Merchant} is suspended).
    However, this issue can be easily fixed if we remove the requirement to have
    at least one {Resource} for each {Merchant}.

    This goes hand in hand with removing the "default resources" we have already
    discussed in the past few days. To fix this bug, would not (yet) remove the
    default {Resource}s completely, but we would remove the requirement for
    {Merchant}s to have at least one {Resource}.

    As side benefit, this would also simplify the API a bit and even the
    behavior of the entire new employees UI be better:

    (a) You could delete all {Employee}s without restrictions. The requirement
        that specific {Employee}s can't be deleted would be gone (right now,
        it's sometimes not allowed to delete a particular {Employee}).
    (b) You can change the assigned {Merchant}s for any all {Employee}s without
        restrictions (right now, it's sometimes not allowed to assigned a
        particular {Merchant}).

    Just example for one of the problems we would fix like this:
    https://jira.shore.com/browse/MA-82
    Read the comments. Even our developments don't understand the requirement
    of "at least one {Resource}". This problem would be gone, if all {Employee}s
    can be deleted.

(2) This is not an issue if we decide answer (1) with Yes.