Comment 25 for bug 1160365

> I can not understand all this big problems and issues on something that apparently is so easy to solve.

Actually, I have the same feeling than you Ana. I can not understand why we have so much confusion and resistance to the change for something that is so easy to solve :)

So, I guess the best is to wait for the development of Olivier (and possibly others), test them and judge based on proposed solutions.

> It's more... we had a solution on previous versions but this is another history and war.

No, the previous solution did not worked perfectly.

In v6.1:

  - No clean solution to sell to persons rather than companies, but also: log a call with a person, assign an issue to a person, ...
  - No clean separation of concepts: partners and addresses --> but usually an address was a contact, not an address
  - No clean address book: the res.partner object was designed for companies but users used it for a mix of individuals and companies due to how it was designed
  - Not easy enough: lambda users did not understood why they had to put a partner and an address on an invoice (and all others documents). I let you test proprietary accounting software, nearly all of them just have one field on the invoice: Customer. (and a lot of users did not even understood what's a partner --> they think it's related to partnership)
  - Not clean logic between all modules using the same objects (res.partner and res.partner.address) with different semantics: sale orders where designed to work with companies, events was designed to work with people
  - base_contact was not good enough