search for: workflow

Hi, I am new to RSpec and BDD. I was wondering if RSpec specifications are a good solution for testing REST webservices (not implemented in Rails). If so, what would be a good way to test something like the API described below? =========== GET http://localhost/workflow text/xml Result: 200 OK <?xml version="1.0"?> <workflows> <workflow>flow1</workflow> <workflow>flow2</workflow> <workflow>flow3</workflow> </workflows> POST http://localhost/workflow?name=flow4 t...

Hi, I am new to RSpec and BDD. I was wondering if RSpec specifications are a good solution for testing REST webservices (not implemented in Rails). If so, what would be a good way to test something like the API described below? =========== GET http://localhost/workflow text/xml Result: 200 OK <?xml version="1.0"?> <workflows> <workflow>flow1</workflow> <workflow>flow2</workflow> <workflow>flow3</workflow> </workflows> POST http://localhost/workflow?name=flow4 t...

Hello, I am relativley new to Ruby on Rails and am still in the process of enjoying the features it offers. I wanted to know if theres workflow support in rails. Can some one give me pointers if its possible. Thanks Naveen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060305/43c9abc3/attachment.html

Hello R-users, I am interested to know if there is a tool that allows us to build SAS Enterprise Miner like workflows using the R scripts. For example, let's say I have the R scripts/functions for the following tasks: 1. Data Cleaning 2. Model Building 3. Model Validation 4. Visualization I would like to drag these functions into a workflow and run them together (output of one function becomes input for the...

On 19 August 2016 at 19:35, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: > I think you misunderstood what I meant here. Whether "moving to git" > will affect my workflow depends very much on "how we're moving to > git". That's exactly what I understood. :) > For example, if we do a monorepo, I may now need to lay code out > differently on my filesystem (since I currently check out multiple repos > rooted at llvm), or if we do a mult...

Is there any project or solution for an easy integration of a WFE / WfMS into rails? I''m quite new to this topic, but I probably need a small subset of workflow patterns (or whatever the correct term is) only. Any pointers are welcome. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Now that we have switched to git and I had to leave behind my wonderfully simple svn workflow I have noticed something curious when committing. My typical workflow once my patch is approved on Phabricator has always been: - Update my source tree to latest - Apply the approved patch - Rebuild - Retest - If all is well, commit Having to update again after rebuilding/retesting was extremely...

...se Git, I wonder > why large complex projects like the Linux kernel, Wine, MinGW-w64, > GHC and many many others don't seem to have any major problems using > Git. Lots of projects are also happy with Mercurial, or BZR, or even CVS. Every open source community has its own established workflows by which developers interact with and ultimately contribute to the mainline repository. Those workflows, and the common use cases that lead to them, strongly impact what specific SCM arrangements will or will not work. To take the Linux kernel as an example, they use a very different integration...

...ersonal preference, please. > I don’t disagree, but the flip side of this argument is that git GUIs on *NIX platforms (including OS X) are far better than their svn alternatives, in part because things like committing individual parts of a set of changes independently are standard parts of a git workflow (and, in a large part, because the git CLI is a case study in poor UI design and so people have been far more motivated to write GUIs than for svn). > > David And they almost always leave out big chunks of functionality that are important for several use cases. Basically, they figure out th...

...nd been almost off for many years for multiple reasons. I'm currently trying to recover and while observing the project with a little of distance I noticed the following : - project's activity is pretty low - patches sent to the mailing list (ML) are not likely to be reviewed - Integration workflow is pretty unclear - release cycles are pretty long Please note that I'm not ranting against anyone. We are all working on our free time and do our best. We started a discussion about that topic on the irc channel but I'd prefer to push it to the ML to get feedbacks from others. >From...

...a possible minor concern because asking people to >switch from one set of command line commands to another set of command >line commands is a different beast than asking people to switch from >Explorer-integrated menus and dialogs to the command line (that's a >drastically different workflow to achieve the same end result of >source code version control). +1. I am also bit concerned here. Never used git, but it is fine, I am ready to learn, but now when I am using TortoiseSVN the only command line I am using is for creating the final patch (though I think that is also available in...

...) If I’m stuck using git-svn I kinda feel like there is no real point in changing anything. No real point *for you specifically*. But the vast majority of people would not be stuck using git-svn. And in addition the LLVM project would not be stuck using svn, with all the baggage, hosting issues, workflow issues (for people other than you), etc. The bar by which this proposal should be measured is not "is it a net gain for beanz?" :) I think we'd be thrilled with a "meh" from your corner. On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 11:22 AM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com> wrote: &g...

Hi, I would like to join a samba 4.2.0 file server sitting in a branch office, with connection only to a RODC (and only the RODC can talk to the RWDC). Was wondering what's the workflow for doing this in samba. For Windows machines, Microsoft seems to have planned two workflows for this: 1. Use new flag to NetJoinDomain() API to join using the RODC (https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd728035%28v=ws.10%29.aspx#run_join_script). With this workflow, the machine account i...

Hi all, I have recently given commit access to LLVM and successfully pushed a test commit from my local master branch. However, I can’t find which is the recommended workflow for committing more serious stuff using git alone. I have read the docs but everything seems to still require svn before bridging to github. I want to use git alone to commit a patch that I got reviewed. I currently have a local 'master' branch that I keep identical to the upstream branch....

...Bogner via llvm-dev wrote: > Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> writes: >> On 19 August 2016 at 19:35, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: >>> I think you misunderstood what I meant here. Whether "moving to git" >>> will affect my workflow depends very much on "how we're moving to >>> git". >> >> That's exactly what I understood. :) >> >>> For example, if we do a monorepo, I may now need to lay code out >>> differently on my filesystem (since I currently check out multipl...

...s no real point in changing anything. >> >> No real point *for you specifically*. >> >> But the vast majority of people would not be stuck using git-svn. And >> in addition the LLVM project would not be stuck using svn, with all >> the baggage, hosting issues, workflow issues (for people other than >> you), etc. >> >> The bar by which this proposal should be measured is not "is it a net >> gain for beanz?" :) I think we'd be thrilled with a "meh" from your >> corner. > Justin, I don’t think this conversa...

...ng for documentation for these two groups is centered around git. For the most part, our documentation currently lives in the wiki, and has a fairly high barrier to new contributors. Would the regulars who contribute on the wiki consider consider supporting a migration to a git based documentation workflow? I think this would help lower the barrier to contribution by allowing new contributors to submit a pull request or patch for documentation rather than join a mailing list, request access, etc. What are the thoughts or concerns about this sort of workflow change? -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Pro...

> After git, mainline will still be the most important branch for the > *project*, > but you will work with quite a few branches on parallel. > > Who's mainline? :) Be prepared to assign a super-merger, like Linus, to maintain the "mainline". The git workflow works really really great, but it does require getting rid of mainline thinking. It doesn't exist. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20110723/fb3584ab/attachment.html>

...ill result in unwanted community fragmentation and others These are all valid concerns, but a big portion of the thread was focused on migration of the existing bugs, community fragmentation issues, etc. We feel it would also be useful to ask a more focused question on whether using the proposed **workflow** of tracking issues in multiple GitHub projects is a good fit for LLVM, ignoring the migration costs and such. Please note we're not proposing to migrate from Bugzilla right away or saying that's the only way to go forward with LLVM issue tracking, we merely want to understand what the com...

On 29 Jul 2016, at 05:11, Mehdi Amini via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > What I meant by “different problem" is that “downstream users” for instance don’t need to commit, that makes their problem/workflow quite different from an upstream developer (for instance it is fairly easy to maintain a read-only view of the existing individual git repo currently on llvm.org). I’m not convinced by this distinction. A lot of downstream developers need to patch LLVM and we benefit when they upstream their chan...