[Anthill-pro] generic workflow reuse

[Steve Boone]

Aaron,

We hope to release 3.4 in early October.

Also, we will support the reusing of workflow configurations.

Cheers,
Steve

On 8/8/07, Neerenberg, Aaron <Aaron.Neerenberg at fei.com> wrote:
>
> OK.  Two questions in response then :)
>
> 1- Do you have an expected ETA for release of 3.4?
> 2- Would this also include the concept of a reusable workflow library?
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: anthill-pro-bounces at lists.urbancode.com
> [mailto:anthill-pro-bounces at lists.urbancode.com] On Behalf Of Eric
> Minick
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 2:05 PM
> To: AnthillPro user and support list.
> Subject: Re: [Anthill-pro] generic workflow reuse
>
> Aaron,
>
> You can't do this today, but we completely agree with you. What we'll be
>
> introducing in 3.4 is a "job library". These will allow you to have jobs
>
> that are hooked into a project by reference rather than by copy. So if
> you change the library job, everyone who uses it will be able to take
> advantage.
>
> Today, if you find yourself facing a situation where a change to job
> might need to be replicated many, many times it might be worth scripting
>
> useing the remoting library.
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric
>
> Neerenberg, Aaron wrote:
> > Just a quick question :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > Is there a way to create a generic job configuration in such a way
> that
> > it is can be inserted into projects other than the project in which it
> > is created?  I might be missing something obvious, but I'm not really
> > seeing a way to do this.
> >
> >
> >
> > What I would really like to do is have a collection of builds that all
> > use shared job configurations, so that I can fix a job configuration
> > once, and not have to fix individual copies for each project using
> that
> > configuration.  I'd be happy to use a project template to accomplish
> > this, but it appears that creating a project template involves a copy
> of
> > the template project.  If I do this, would the template project and
> the
> > copy actually share the same generic job, or would each simply have
> > their own copy of the generic job configuration?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for any thoughts/advice :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > Aaron Neerenberg
> >
> > SCM/Build
> >
> > FEI Company
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Anthill-pro mailing list
> > Anthill-pro at lists.urbancode.com
> > http://lists.urbancode.com/mailman/listinfo/anthill-pro
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Anthill-pro mailing list
> Anthill-pro at lists.urbancode.com
> http://lists.urbancode.com/mailman/listinfo/anthill-pro
> _______________________________________________
> Anthill-pro mailing list
> Anthill-pro at lists.urbancode.com
> http://lists.urbancode.com/mailman/listinfo/anthill-pro
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.urbancode.com/pipermail/anthill-pro/attachments/20070809/d1ba89d3/attachment.htm