> On 27 Dec 2014, at 01:39, W Chan <m4d.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What you’re saying is that whatever is under “$.env” is just the exact same > > environment that we passed when we started the workflow? If yes then it > > definitely makes sense to me (it just allows to explicitly access > > environment, not through the implicit variable lookup). Please confirm. > Yes. the $.env that I original proposed would be the same dict as the one > supplied at start_workflow. Although we have to agree whether the variables > in the environment are allowed to change after the WF started. Unless > there's a valid use case, I would lean toward making env immutable.
Let’s make them immutable. > > One thing that I strongly suggest is that we clearly define all reserved > > keys like “env”, “__actions” etc. I think it’d be better if they all > > started with the same prefix, for example, double underscore. > > Agree. How about using double underscore for env as well (i.e. $.__env.var1, > $.__env.var2)? Yes. Renat Akhmerov @ Mirantis Inc.
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
