Hi all, On Tuesday, November 20, 2007 12:27 PM Alexander Klink wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 01:13:35AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: >> Revision: 1149 >> http://openxpki.svn.sourceforge.net/openxpki/?rev=1149&view=rev >> Author: pgrig >> Date: 2007-11-20 01:13:34 -0800 (Tue, 20 Nov 2007) >> >> Log Message: >> ----------- >> The certificate-issuance workflow modified so that in the case of enabled >> ldap-publishing >> the CSR workflow get the notification from the children too and does not >> stay in >> WAITING_FOR_CHILD state any more. > I don't believe your change is necessary, if you have a look at > workflow_activity_certificate_issuance.xml, you can see that > child_finished_successfully and child_finished_failure already do the > notification to the parent (in fact they are the same as > notify_parent_success and notify_parent_failure, cf. the comment in the > definition). > Your change introduces two new states that are not really necessary, > so if there is not a good reason against it, I'd propose reverting it. I see a following problem here. When ldap is disabled the certificate_issuance workflow executes action notify_parent_success which is defined in workflow_activity_certificate_issuance.xml. This action executes the action of the parent (CSR) workflow child_finished_successfully which is defined in workflow_activity_certificate_signing_request.xml as Null (doing nothing). So CSR workflow comes to SUCCESS state. When ldap is enabled ldap_publishing workflow executes action notify_parent_success. This action executes the action of the parent (cert_issuance) workflow child_finished_successfully which is really defined in workflow_activity_certificate_issuance.xml in the same way as notify_parent_success but redefined in workflow_activity_certificate_signing_request.xml as Null (doing nothing). That is why the certificate_issuance workflow accepts the signal from ldap publishing but does not pass it up to CSR. It seems to me that those two things (accept the signal from the child and pass it to the parent) cannot be done simultaneously this way. You has already told me (Tuesday, October 30, 2007 12:25 PM) that actions defined in several xml files do not interfere each other. It looks like they do (actually all xml files are included in workflow.xml one by one aren't they?). In such a case we should not remove new states. We have no test for csr->certificate_issue->ldap_publishing chain so the effect is observable only on the installed OpenXPKI. Actually I have started rewriting workflow_looping test to check the new parent-child relations and met the mentioned difficulties with actions and notifications. Best regards, Petr Grigoriev ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ OpenXPKI-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openxpki-devel
