Re: [Perl-workflow-devel] Typed conditions and perl config

[Jonas B. N. <jo...@gm...>]

On 18/03/2008, at 12.53, Jim Brandt wrote:

>
> Jonas Brømsø Nielsen wrote:
>> Hi Jim,
>> And others, I can do a release - do you want it to be an alpha  
>> release, we have not used this earlier, but if you want to it is  
>> certainly possible.
>
> We could do an alpha release. That would imply that some people  
> would download and test that release and maybe give feedback before  
> we promoted it. Any feeling on whether that would happen? I know I  
> could try the alpha release and that would confirm that the CPAN  
> version matches what I'm testing now (and I didn't sneak something  
> into my test version).
>
> How long would we leave it in alpha?
>

I have never used alpha releases before, I have however considered it  
for Workflow for a long time, since a lot of people are using it in  
production.

I say we try it out, see some testers feedback and then make an  
official release. Just to try out this new release strategy.

jonasbn

>> jonasbn
>> On 17/03/2008, at 13.18, Jim Brandt wrote:
>>> Has anyone had a chance to try any of the new functionality?
>>>
>>> We've been running it in our dev and QA environments and so far
>>> everything appears to be working correctly.
>>>
>>> Any chance we could look at a plan to release to CPAN?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jim
>>>
>>> Jim Brandt wrote:
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> I've checked in changes for the following:
>>>>
>>>> * conditions can now be typed, so if you have foo and a bar  
>>>> workflows,
>>>> they can implement the condition AdminRequired with the same  
>>>> name, but
>>>> different code for each.
>>>>
>>>> * I applied all the type changes to the perl config.
>>>>
>>>> Other notes:
>>>>
>>>> * I decided not to implement types for validators because I  
>>>> couldn't
>>>> come up with a case where a validator would vary by type. I mean
>>>> 'is_number' or 'is_email_address' should be the same regardless  
>>>> of a type.
>>>>
>>>> * The tests for perl configuration were very light, so most of my  
>>>> time
>>>> was spent trying to add testing infrastructure for perl configs.
>>>>
>>>> * There was no testing of persister configs, so I added some.  
>>>> There is
>>>> room for more.
>>>>
>>>> * I discovered that the persister configuration isn't consistent  
>>>> with
>>>> the other methods. For example, in the xml, actions look like:
>>>>
>>>> <actions>
>>>>  <action>
>>>>
>>>> But persisters don't have that outer tag level. It would probably  
>>>> be
>>>> good to add it at some point, but it would be tricky to do so and  
>>>> not
>>>> break things for older installs.
>>>>
>>>> So if you get a chance, let me know if the new tests work on your
>>>> systems. Even better, if you have real workflow systems in a dev  
>>>> area,
>>>> let me know if anything is broken there. I'm going to continue  
>>>> testing
>>>> on my systems.
>>>>
>>>> Jim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Jim Brandt
>>> Administrative Computing Services
>>> University at Buffalo
>>>
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
>>> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
>>> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Perl-workflow-devel mailing list
>>> Per...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perl-workflow-devel
>
> -- 
> Jim Brandt
> Administrative Computing Services
> University at Buffalo
>