I'm working on issues exchange between Integrity and Dante (via Integrity Integration Platform, but it is not so relevant now). There is a "Protocols" feature in Dante, for examlple, it looks like this:
|<entry name="supplier project manager" text="issue accepted, will be fixed in the desired release" timeStamp="2013-11-22T12:08:52+00:00"/>|
|<entry name="supplier exchangeUser" text="issue taken from customer" timeStamp="2013-11-21T12:13:53+00:00"/>|
|<entry name="customer project manager" text="Intended Releases: V2.1.1" timeStamp="2013-11-15T14:28:27+00:00"/>|
|<entry name="customer development engineer" text="Protocol field to be implemented " timeStamp="2013-11-15T14:28:27+00:00"/>|
|<entry name="customer test engineer" text="Protocol field still not functional" timeStamp="2013-11-15T14:20:00+00:00"/>|
As you can see, one "Protocols" can contain many entries, each entry has name, text and time stamp.
This "Protocols" feature serves as communication protocol and exchange of messages. Both sides can add entires. Name and time stamp are atached automatically when an user adds some text.
My question is: what is the best way to support this feature at Integrity side? Is there something similar at Integrity which can be used for storing and handling this kind of feature?
In Integrity you have the discussion-type fields that are closed to the DanTe Protocol field.
You may need to create a single field dedicated for the customer exchange and adapt the mapping for the differences in the format in your connector.
in addition to Thierry's idea you could either use the item's History log, if don't to be limited to text based discussions; or you could choose to utilize the audit log features provides by the server.
Some deeper information about your use-case might be helpful here.