[MAGNOLIA-1415] Quick fix for default workflow definition. Created: 28/Feb/07  Updated: 23/Jan/13  Resolved: 11/Dec/07

Status: Closed
Project: Magnolia
Component/s: workflow
Affects Version/s: 3.1 M1
Fix Version/s: 3.5 RC1

Type: Improvement Priority: Minor
Reporter: Popa Bogdan Assignee: Vivian Steller
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: 0.25h
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: 0.25h

Issue Links:
relation
is related to MAGNOLIA-1953 activation workflow can not send e-ma... Closed
is related to MAGNOLIA-1952 Update: default workflow definition h... Closed
Template:
Acceptance criteria:
Empty
Task DoD:
[ ]* Doc/release notes changes? Comment present?
[ ]* Downstream builds green?
[ ]* Solution information and context easily available?
[ ]* Tests
[ ]* FixVersion filled and not yet released
[ ]  Architecture Decision Record (ADR)
Date of First Response:

 Description   

There is a problem with the default activation definition found in the default.xml file. The "revision round" sub is not working ok if a publisher is rejecting the activation. The content is sent back to the editor but the editor can't publish it again to the publisher!
I saw that the inbox is not shown for an editor but I think that it is a feature that must be enable!
I have found a quick way to fix this problem:
Replacing :
"
<while test="${field:action} == reject"/>
"
with
"
<while>
<equals field-value="action" other-value="reject" />
</while>
"
and
"
<process-definition name="to-publisher">
<participant ref="group-publisher"/>
</process-definition>
"
with
"
<process-definition name="to-publisher">
<sequence>
<!-- reset the assignTo field so the editor not longer see the workflow items -->
<unset field="assignTo"/>
<participant ref="group-publisher" />
</sequence>
</process-definition>
"

Hope this helps!
Thanks for your great work!



 Comments   
Comment by Nicolas Modrzyk [ 02/Mar/07 ]

surely John knows better about the flow definition than me ...
I am forwarding to him to check...

Comment by John Mettraux [ 02/Mar/07 ]

Hi Nicolas,

yes, I saw that, but I wasn't reacting as it seems rather a fix than anything else.

Someone should just commit that fix.

Cheers,

John

Comment by Magnolia International [ 11/May/07 ]

just out of curiosity, does the first change (on the while statement) actually makes any difference ??

Comment by Magnolia International [ 02/Nov/07 ]

Applying this - but the piece below puzzles me. Is the syntax correct ?
<process-definition name="revision-round">
<loop>
<while>
<equals field-value="action" other-value="reject" />
</while>
<to-editor/>

<if test="${field:action} != proceed">
<break/>
</if>

<to-publisher/>
</loop>
</process-definition>

Comment by Magnolia International [ 22/Nov/07 ]

Will double check for RC2.
(note: in case no change is needed, then reset fix version RC1)

Comment by Vivian Steller [ 11/Dec/07 ]

re-checked. works nicely with that fix (nothing to be changed on svn), so reset fix version to rc1.

Generated at Mon Feb 12 03:26:42 CET 2024 using Jira 9.4.2#940002-sha1:46d1a51de284217efdcb32434eab47a99af2938b.