On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 1:10 AM, choda <[email protected]> wrote: > > Although it's obviously not necessary for a short script like this, > what options do I have if I want to : > - move the process definition away from this file ? > - move the (block)participants away from this file and still be able > to access the "workitem" fields ? > To keep it simple, what's the nice way to split workflow.rb into > { workflow_engine.rb, processes.rb, my_process.rb } > > Again, this question may be dumb, but I'm lacking workflow engine/ > ruote (and ruby, by the way, though I'm not sure it's relevant) > experience and as far as I've read, I've seen no example of a workflow > divided in several files, with the engine on one side and processes or > participant definition in different places.
Hi Marc, here is a set of files that achieve the separation you asked for : http://gist.github.com/92127 run it with "ruby main.rb". Note that it's simply using Ruby require. The engine is placed inside the "Engine" constant for easy access. Here is another variation : http://gist.github.com/92130 Where the definition is not "required" but simply loaded. Note that if you had it available on a web server you could write things like : Engine.launch('http://processes.ina.fr/categorizing_process.rb') (the funny thing with that is when you generate a process definition on the fly, but that's another story). Such remote definitions are OK only when the engine has the option :remote_definitions_allowed set to true. Best regards, -- John Mettraux - http://jmettraux.wordpress.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group. to post : send email to [email protected] to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected] more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
