On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:57:55AM -0700, simcha wrote: > > Yes but than you need to put it somehow in the process right sth like: > > publish, :ver => '1' > > Don't know witch is better. I'm not sure if this is more consistent. > When you have this ver in process definition than to be consistent we > need: > > ["workflow_name","workflow_revision", > "participant_name_and_optionally_revision"] > ["workflow_name", "participant_name_and_optionally_revision"] > ["participant_name_and_optionally_revision"] > throw error when participant_name exist in any stage before but > revision not, or am I wrong?
Hello, you're right, let's get back to your initial idea. I will implement something tomorrow. > By the way I could not reopen issue 23 (don't know how to do it) so I > added a comment > https://github.com/jmettraux/ruote/issues/closed#issue/23/comment/918141 I re-opened it by myself (the "actions" drop down on the top left). Many thanks, -- John Mettraux - http://jmettraux.wordpress.com -- you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group. to post : send email to [email protected] to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected] more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en
