-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.6k
[Workflow] Fixed support of multiple transitions with the same name. #21280
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
Well done ;) |
ecb2992
to
53938a5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like this PR but I think it is missing one test.
Current marking: {a, b}.
You have the following transitions: t1: a->c, t2: b->d. (Both transitions named "foobar")
You should check that {a,b} -> ["foobar"] -> {c,d}.
53938a5
to
e80b866
Compare
@Nyholm I added a new test case. |
The previous behavior was underterministic because it took the first transition during the `can` and the `apply` method. But the "first" does not mean anything. Now the workflow apply all possible transitions with the same name.
e80b866
to
edd5431
Compare
👍 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome!
This is not strictly a bug fix. I understand that the current behavior is not the "right"/"expected" one, but I don't think this qualifies as something for 3.2. I would recommend to merge it in 3.3 instead. @lyrixx Can you add a note in the component CHANGELOG about this change? |
IMHO, it should go on 3.2 because it will be impossible for 3.2 users to have the correct behavior, and then when they will upgrade to 3.3, the behavior will be different than what they know. |
Please note that there are not new visible interface, so it's a pure behavioral change |
Thank you @lyrixx. |
…same name. (lyrixx) This PR was merged into the 3.2 branch. Discussion ---------- [Workflow] Fixed support of multiple transitions with the same name. | Q | A | ------------- | --- | Branch? | 3.2 | Bug fix? | yes | New feature? | no | BC breaks? | no | Deprecations? | no | Tests pass? | yes | Fixed tickets | - | License | MIT | Doc PR | - --- The previous behavior was underterministic because it took the first transition during the `can` and the `apply` method. But the "first" does not mean anything. Now the workflown apply all possible transitions with the same name. Commits ------- edd5431 [Workflow] Fixed support of multiple transition with the same name.
The previous behavior was underterministic because it took the first
transition during the
can
and theapply
method. But the "first"does not mean anything. Now the workflown apply all possible transitions
with the same name.