Hi, I have noticed that we allow users to modify a lifecycle that is already assigned to resources. Did we do a complete analysis of the situations that could come by allowing this behavior?
I have noticed the following inconsistent behavior due to this. When saving the lifecycle configuration, it only gives a warning saying* "ServiceLifeCycle is already in use and your changes may affect existing usage. Are you sure you want to save these Lifecycle changes?"* There is no descriptive explanation about what is the impact of the change. It happens to be that, if you rename a state, and if there were resources on that state, the lifecycle portlet disappear from the UI. There is no way to remove, add or do any action on the lifecycle for that resource and that resource is completely unusable(from LC point of view) from that point onward. Also we do not update the existing resources with the change. If we add a new check item or change a check item of an existing state, that change is not reflected for the resources that are already associated with the lifecycle. Because of that, G-Reg began to have resources with the same lifecycle, but with different behaviors. Therefore, I'm wondering what is the purpose of modifying a lifecycle which is already in use. IMO, this had introduced a inconsistent behavior and had not solve anything. The real problem comes when there is a high number of resources that is associated with the lifecycle. Thanks, Janaka -- *Janaka Ranabahu* Senior Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com * E-mail: [email protected] <http://wso2.com>**M: **+94 718370861* Lean . Enterprise . Middleware
_______________________________________________ Architecture mailing list [email protected] https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
