On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:14 PM, John Mettraux <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:07:45AM -0700, Ian Smith-Heisters wrote: >> >> You win ;) We're just going to scrap the synchronization with the >> end-user, and do it later with AJAX push. In the meantime they'll have >> to rely on email notification and refreshing their browser. > > Hello, > > Ouch, I did not mean to provoke such big changes.
Heh, no, we've been planning on it anyway ;) > >> There's >> still an open question on how to best test Ruote while embracing its >> asynchronicity. Even your tests use wait_for to force synchronization, >> right? > > Yes, I pause the test thread until a participant receives a workitem > (wait_for(:alpha)), the flow terminates or runs into an error > (wait_for(wfid)). When the event occurs, the observer wakes up our test > thread and the test resumes. > > Maybe that's something like this that you want for your end-user request > processing, but you'd have to make sure to use a timeout. > yes, that's pretty much what we've been doing, and what we'll continue doing in our tests. It does mean the tests can't use multiple workers because the observer doesn't work cross-process without the aforementioned global event queue. This is somewhat problematic because it introduces differences between the test and production environments. -ISH > > 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 > -- 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
