[Anthill-pro] Question about job failure within workflows

[Eric Minick]

Chad,

There are arguments for continueing anyway. Taking a deeper look, we 
agree that the default behavior should be to stop the workflow. This has 
been filed as a critical issue for 3.2. Hopefully we'll present 
continuation conditions for jobs like we do steps, but we'll at least 
have the stop if the last job failed in there.

-- Eric

Chad Loder wrote:

>On Wed, Feb 07, 2007 at 09:55:25AM -0700, Eric Minick wrote:
>  
>
>>Chad,
>>
>>I need to look into this. Is the problem that a job fails, and then the 
>>next job is executed anyway?
>>    
>>
>
>That is correct. I consider this a show-stopper because status tags and
>stamping occur on failed builds, which is really bad for obvious reasons.
>
>  
>
>>Chad Loder wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi. I have noticed that when a step of a workflow fails, the next
>>>tasks in the workflow execute regardless. Is there a way to
>>>have the workflow abort and fail when a step fails, rather than
>>>continuing on and attempting all the next steps?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>	c
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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
>  
>