I have been using the latest formsflow.ai v4.0.3. I am looking to see if there is support for
versioning of forms and workflow? If it's already available, how can I use it.
I am also interested to understand how exactly is the versioning implemented in case of forms and workflows
The versioning with forms is available only with form.io enterprise edition, So we haven't covered the versioning part separately. However, we will be thinking about some alternatives in formsflow.ai.
Workflow part in formsflow.ai is handled using camunda, So versioning in Camunda is already available with opensource.
Related
Is there a way to advertise and have consumers tell from the available REST APIs for repos or their branches or releases that particular releases or major version branches are actively supported, maintenance support, or unsupported? Or application of some common support policy, like "n-2 major releases supported"?
This is towards writing automation that can alert, or even automate updating of dependent versions based on availability (e.g., there's a supported version to upgrade from my maintenance version).
From the GitHub API alone, no, as the notion of "support" is not a primary notion.
You could setup for a release naming convention, which would then allow the interpretation of the repos/releases API.
Or describe that support explicitly in the README that you can get through the repos/contents API.
But any solution you might consider will involve some kind of convention/normalization.
I use Nuxeo for content management purposes on a project.
I know I'll also need to support "workflow" scenarios, which I currently know very little about.
For example: I'll need to support a workflow scenario for approving a release of a software component.
Such an approval may be composed of several different stages, and in every stage I may need to trigger some kind of an automatic interaction with certain users of the system.
What may be considered some good/valid considerations for not "settling for" the workflow engine provided by Nuxeo, and using a dedicated engine such as Activiti or jBPM instead?
I know the question is very (perhaps too) broad, but still:
What could be some points to consider before I choose one over the other?
Are there other tools I should consider?
Yes, your question IS too broad. every workflow tool has its own cons and pros. why don't you list down all of your needs then compare each of the tools. mainly: Alfresco Activiti, Camunda, jBPM or Nuxeo
Is it possible to integrate Sitecore with external workflow engine (K2, Skelta), and if so, how to connect external workflow with Sitecore content item, and do i need to implement new interface in Sitecore (like workbox).
The reason why i need this, because current Sitecore workflow does not have all features that other workflow engines have, like escalating workflow items or parallel approval steps.
There are at least two ways. The most common way is to use Sitecore workflow actions to hand items off to the external workflow system. Another way is to implement the IWorkflowProvider and possibly related interfaces to abstract the external workflow engine completely. I personally have never tried either approach, so I can't provide any detail.
According to the sitecore website they list open architecture as a benefit. They even go so far as to say.
"Integrate with third-party systems: Sitecore CMS provides a full data integration and
abstraction layer that allows you to connect to any database, web service or other external systems"
So theoretically it is possible. (Full disclosure, I do work for K2) I will ask around to see if anyone internally has done this before.
Anyone else out there done anything similar?
Does anybody know if there have been any code-first templates created by the CodeSmith community? I see in their next version they are planning support, but was curious if someone in the community is planning on creating one. I have an older copy, so won't get new templates in their new version.
I didn't see any, hence the post if anyone has.
Thanks.
I'm not aware of any publicly distributed set of templates for EF4 and CodeSmith Generator. The templates we are creating will work on CodeSmith Generator 5.x. If you check our twitter we have a special offer that could be used for a license or upgrade. By upgrading you will benefit from a lot of enhancements and features / bug fixes. Plus you will be getting access to managed and supported EF4 templates (which are free and open source).
Thanks
-Blake Niemyjski
There is a pretty strong need for us to design some workflows around various processes. The problem is none of us actually know any workflow technology yet, and finding good data to compare the available options has been tedious and not entirely fruitful.
So I figured I'd ask you guys.
The main technologies we are looking at are Windows Workflow Foundation and eDocs Workflow. What other options are there? Sharepoint 2007 has workflow functionality too, right? Is that just based on WF?
What are the pros and cons of the various technologies? How do they compare?
EDIT: Also, one feature the administrative types like with eDocs Workflow is that it provides a method for them to edit it themselves. I believe Sharepoint '07 does as well. Is there some other way to allow that with a straight WWF implementation?
Sharepoint and WF more like complementary technologies, designed as two different workflow authoring tools in the same ecosystem. There's a Sharepoint workflow designer, and a WF (Windows Workflow Foundation) workflow designer.
The Sharepoint designer is meant to be an Office-like workflow editing experience, easier to get started with, geared for non-technical types, and generates all the web forms automatically.
The 'WF' workflow designer on the other hand is actually a component of Visual Studio (by default - as Bernie says you can rehost it), and designed to allow programmers to be able to fully customize workflow, and integrate it with any other code/systems desired. Building and deploying sharepoint sites this way is still possible, through the use of 'Sharepoint Activities', but more complex.
If you take the former route, you can hopefully let the administrative types do their own basic customizations (up to the limits of that environment) without causing total chaos.
It is possible to 'rehost' the WF designer (the one from Visual Studio) in your own application, so that users can author workflows. There are a number of code examples on the web, the most important one from MS itself: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa480213.aspx).
At some point, when evaluating WF, I implemented a demo application that did this and added some features and found that although it works, not everybody can understand and use the more difficult activities (like the policy activity) that require understanding of how the rules engine works.