AW: [Anthill-pro] Workflow Dependencies - Dynmic Build Life Criteria

[Eric Minick]

There is a reason. Its for developer builds using the codestation  
client. Workflow properties can be unnatural at best outside of the  
formal build environment.

We're considering adding this functionality with the understanding  
that teams whose developers use codestation would not take advantage  
of it.

-- eric



On Apr 1, 2008, at 12:04 PM, "Lanser, Peter" <Peter.Lanser at 3beg.at>  
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm talking about the stamp value within a build life criteria of a  
> dependency definition.
>
> Suppose the following:
>
> - "Project A"
> - Originating Workflow "Build A"
> - Has existing BuildLifes: e.g. 1.0.0 and 2.0.0
>
> - "Project B"
> - Originating Workflow "Build B"
> - Dependens on "Project A - Build A"
>
> Now what we originally wanted was that the user running "Build B"  
> could choose which BuildLife the workflow should depend on by  
> setting a workflow property or something else (not by editing the  
> workflow dependencies definition per se) - which would be 1.0.0 or  
> 2.0.0 in the above  example.
>
> However, as dependency definitions do not support the use of  
> workflow properties we came to the conclusion that we're on the  
> wrong road and we found another solution (redesign of the whole  
> process).
>
> So for us, this isn't an issue any more. Nevertheless I'd like to  
> know if there's any reason for not supporting workflow properties  
> within a build criteria of a dependency definition.
>
> Regards,
> Peter
>
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: anthill-pro-bounces at lists.urbancode.com [mailto:anthill-pro-bounces at lists.urbancode.com 
> ] Im Auftrag von Steve Boone
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 01. April 2008 17:39
> An: AnthillPro user and support list.
> Betreff: Re: [Anthill-pro] Workflow Dependencies - Dynmic Build Life  
> Criteria
>
> Peter,
>
> You are pulling the stamp from the dependency?  Can you outline the  
> process with a little more detail?  Perhaps together we can come up  
> with a working solution.
>
> Is this in an incrementing value?  what do you vision the stamp will  
> look like?
>
> Regards,
> Steve Boone
>
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Lanser, Peter  
> <Peter.Lanser at 3beg.at> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> one can define a status and/or a stamp which will be used to find a  
> Build Life which fulfills a dependency.
>
> We have a workflow which has dependencies. Our aim is that users  
> executing this workflow can determine which build life should be  
> used for a dependency without having write access for the project.  
> So I defined a workflow property and used this property as a stamp  
> value within the dependency definition - but it doesn't work.
>
> I'm thinking of a script that sets the stamp value before any  
> dependency is processed. Is this possible somehow?
> One problem with this approach is that I don't know where and when  
> such a script should be triggered. I found out that it's too late  
> within the workflow definition      because dependencies seem to be  
> processed before any job was executed.
>
> Does anybody have an idea how this problem could be solved? Thanks.
>
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> Anthill-pro mailing list
> Anthill-pro at lists.urbancode.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080401/030cc4e1/attachment.htm