Hi Rebecca,
we are currently working on a functionality that will allow users to determine the order in which component workflows get executed.
If you have the time to talk to us, please provide us your availability and we would jump on a WebEx with you, to assure we cover your requirement.
Regards,
Paul Meresanu
Product Line Manager | Continuous Delivery Automation & Release Automation
Enterprise Software Division
Broadcom
office: +43 (0) 570 810 1124 | mobile: +43 (0) 664 120 3179
Am Europlatz 5 | Vienna, Austria, 1120
Paul.Meresanu@broadcom.com | broadcom.com
------------------------------
CA Technologies , a Broadcom Company
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 07-18-2019 09:31 PM
From: R V
Subject: Workflow Component Order
Trying to figure out tasks (child tasks) in a workflow and reorder them turned out to be a real pain, finding child tasks was rather hard, ended up resorting to a SQL query.
Problem was making sure the component names matched the correct order when the component names could be anything.
So I figured out a better solution, it seems the components are created in numerical and possibly (have not tested) alphabetical order, when the application workflow is created.
Prefixing a number to the start of the component "Name" means the components are placed in order. eg. 1.FirstStep, 2.SecondStep etc
It would be nice to be able to set that order a better way, like via application template or some other way, but for now this works
Original Message:
Sent: 07-01-2019 12:00 AM
From: R V
Subject: Workflow Component Order
Is there any way to automatically set the Application workflow order for components, without having to manually edit the workflow?
I have finally figured out how to set up component workflow templates, so I am able to get users to create simple deployments using the wizard, but seems the order of those components are random at best.
I know I could possibly use a MODIFY_TASK but am not sure what effect that would in CDA/ARA, possibly as some kind of Stateflow?
Or the other option would be to just combine the two components into one but surely there is a better answer.
Monday morning breaking my head trying to figure this one out.