Maybe the feature is to allow the specification of one or more policies to
apply to flows
before they are deployed.

The system would provide a default policy for status quo ante.
You could provide a ‘NoAutoTerminationPolicy’.

This could be a component run by nar etc etc


On March 25, 2017 at 05:14:03, Michal Klempa (michal.kle...@gmail.com)
wrote:

Hi Russell,
what about checking the flow.xml prior to deploying it into production
use. Search for you particular processors and the
<autoTerminatedRelationship>success</autoTerminatedRelationship>
pattern.
One can integrate such QA checks into CI/CD pipeline as we do using
Jenkins.

Hope that helps.
Michal

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Russell Bateman <r...@windofkeltia.com>
wrote:
> Thanks, Joe.
>
> (Sorry.)
>
> Yes, it seems overly big-brotherish. I mean, it's a tool, after all. It's
> our down-streamer manager that asked if we could prohibit this
possibility
> for certain processors whose auto-termination has proved especially
> dangerous. I'm exercising due diligence by asking. I may or may not
> experiment with Aldrin's suggestion. I could emit a warning at least.
>
> Thanks to both of you.
>
>
> On 03/24/2017 03:05 PM, Joe Witt wrote:
>>
>> Russell
>>
>> There is no way to block that while still allowing someone to have the
>> ability to alter the flow. That said, you could certainly have a
>> reporting task or script that runs over the provenance events to find
>> any such cases. There would be a drop event and its details would
>> tell you it was auto terminated. So you can't block them from doing
>> it at present but you can make a naughty list and go talk to them
>> afterward.
>>
>> I'm not sure I'd be a big fan of restricting it personally.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joe
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Russell Bateman <r...@windofkeltia.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> ...of a relationship?
>>>
>>> In some of our custom processors, we'd like to remove the possibility
>>> from
>>> our user of ever auto-terminating, in particular, selected processors'
>>> failure relationships. (I realize that the user can "drain" the
failures
>>> away into paths that amount to auto-termination, but that should be
>>> explicit.)
>>>
>>> Or does the community consider this to be purely a question of
>>> self-discipline?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>
>

Reply via email to