You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I recently implemented something very similar to this (I wish I had learned of this project a couple of months sooner).
In my version the "Work" interface was subclassed into several types: OneToOne, OneToMany, ManyToOne and ManyToMany. Each one had a slightly different signature. OneToOne was like your Work interface, takes in one WorkContext and produces one WorkContext, but OneToMany took in one WorkContext and produces a Stream of WorkContexts. Likewise, the ManyToOne takes in a Stream and produces a single WorkContext and ManyToMany takes in a Stream and produces a Stream of WorkContexts.
The reason I did it this way was to create reusable Work implementations that I could mix together in a variety of ways. For example, one Work implementation called "WriteToFolderWork" could take in one WorkContext that contains an XML and write it to a folder. This is a OneToOne Work implementation. Another Work implementation (say, called "SplitXmlWork") could split a single XML into several pieces. This would be a OneToMany Work implementation. The workflow framework too care of converting a "Many" output from one step to a repeating set of "One" inputs to another step and vice-versa.
Have you thought about something similar for easy-flows and rejected it? What are your thoughts?
I am contemplating the idea of forking your project, enhancing it and then replacing my implementation with a modified version of yours. I'd like to gauge your interest in these changes to see if I could submit a PR after I am done. Also, you may have another approach in mind that I haven't considered which is already handled by the current codebase.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Unfortunately it seems to me that the project is not active anymore...
I did not pickup a solution yet, I am also looking into jobrunr but a lot of features are missing in the free edition like dependencies between tasks.
Did you fork the project in the end ?
I did fork it but I have not done much with it. I did start some changes, but I think maybe they are just on a local branch at this point. I got distracted by other things and have not come back to it. I still think it is a reasonable starting point but the code is a little simplistic (IMO) in spots. It casts Object where generic could perhaps be used instead. Still, it is simple and easy to understand. I just haven't had the need to invest time in it yet.
I recently implemented something very similar to this (I wish I had learned of this project a couple of months sooner).
In my version the "Work" interface was subclassed into several types: OneToOne, OneToMany, ManyToOne and ManyToMany. Each one had a slightly different signature. OneToOne was like your Work interface, takes in one WorkContext and produces one WorkContext, but OneToMany took in one WorkContext and produces a Stream of WorkContexts. Likewise, the ManyToOne takes in a Stream and produces a single WorkContext and ManyToMany takes in a Stream and produces a Stream of WorkContexts.
The reason I did it this way was to create reusable Work implementations that I could mix together in a variety of ways. For example, one Work implementation called "WriteToFolderWork" could take in one WorkContext that contains an XML and write it to a folder. This is a OneToOne Work implementation. Another Work implementation (say, called "SplitXmlWork") could split a single XML into several pieces. This would be a OneToMany Work implementation. The workflow framework too care of converting a "Many" output from one step to a repeating set of "One" inputs to another step and vice-versa.
Have you thought about something similar for easy-flows and rejected it? What are your thoughts?
I am contemplating the idea of forking your project, enhancing it and then replacing my implementation with a modified version of yours. I'd like to gauge your interest in these changes to see if I could submit a PR after I am done. Also, you may have another approach in mind that I haven't considered which is already handled by the current codebase.
Any feedback would be appreciated.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: