Yes but than you need to put it somehow in the process right sth like: publish, :ver => '1'
Don't know witch is better. I'm not sure if this is more consistent. When you have this ver in process definition than to be consistent we need: ["workflow_name","workflow_revision", "participant_name_and_optionally_revision"] ["workflow_name", "participant_name_and_optionally_revision"] ["participant_name_and_optionally_revision"] throw error when participant_name exist in any stage before but revision not, or am I wrong? catch all By the way I could not reopen issue 23 (don't know how to do it) so I added a comment https://github.com/jmettraux/ruote/issues/closed#issue/23/comment/918141 Regs, jan On 25 Mar, 19:24, John Mettraux <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:07:55AM -0700, simcha wrote: > > > ["workflow_name","workflow_revision", "participant_name"] > > ["workflow_name", "participant_name"] > > ["workflow_revision", "participant_name"] > > ["participant_name"] > > catch_all > > Hello, > > then what about > > ---8<--- > ["workflow_name","workflow_revision", "participant_name"] > ["workflow_name", "participant_name"] > ["participant_name", "participant_revision"] > ["participant_name"] > catch_all > --->8--- > > ? > > 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
