http://bugzilla.ecoinformatics.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5504
Derik Barseghian <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #4 from Derik Barseghian <[email protected]> 2011-11-08 19:53:50 PST --- I think the question is: How is it that these kars contain different workflows that have the same LSID? I think the idea is that's not supposed to be possible, and we shouldn't try to handle such a case (defeats the purpose of a unique id system). I've spent some time trying to recreate two different workflows with the same LSID, and short of hacking one copy's moml by hand, thankfully I can't. I believe the LSID db keeps track of used LSIDs and their revision numbers, so two copies of the same workflow can 'co-evolve' with unique revision numbers. Also if you delete the db, the next time you revise a workflow it gets a new LSID, and the original is put in the derived from list. Another thing I tried was putting an EML 2 Dataset actor inside a composite, and then changing its parameters, to see if somehow these types of changes are getting swallowed. But this incremented the LSID revision as one would hope. -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.ecoinformatics.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA Contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Kepler-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/kepler/mailman/listinfo/kepler-dev
