On 8/3/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· > RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT > <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42994>. > ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· > INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. > > http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42994 > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-08-03 06:15 ------- > (In reply to comment #4) > > Maybe we can add a some workflow schema presets to the workflow module? > > hmmm. that means publications would have to place their workflow in > <pub>/lenya/modules/workflow/config... > i'd rather have them in webapp/lenya/config/workflow, so that the current > location does not have to change (i hope that's where fallback:// would look, > but i'd need to check that). > but if you disagree, any other place is fine with me. my main issue is that we > do make assumptions about states and transitions being there, and these should > be provided by the core if a publication does not include its own workflow > (and > not just as examples, but as a resource to fallback:// to). > > this core workflow should include authoring and live as states and edit, > publish > and maybe deactivate as events. i guess this is the minimal subset below > which a > cms no longer makes sense. wdyt?
As maybe more of an aside, in theory a cms can also make sense that only has a single merged "authoring/live" state (in which you directly edit the "live" content without requiring a separate "publish" event). AKA a wiki or blog. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
