validations on Assets update

[ndr-brt]

At the moment it's always possible to update an Asset but this shouldn't be the case generally speaking.
I remember this feature was enabled for some sort of "test needs".

I'm getting a lot of feedback and questions about why is this possible, and in fact I think it shouldn't.
In any case, we could find a compromise: we could check that the asset is not referenced in a ContractNegotiation.
If that's the case, update won't be possible.

Wdyt?

[jimmarino]

Here is my opinion:

This goes back to the "red" vs. "redd" debate. It should be possible for people to update "Redd Car" to "Red Car" even if the asset is referenced, assuming there is an override flag that must be set to true if referenced. We (EDC) shouldn't be in the business of saying what constitutes a legally allowable modification.

However, it should always be impossible to modify an asset to an invalid state, regardless of whether it is referenced or not. It should also be impossible to delete an asset if it is referenced.