| Summary: | Only 1 process shown for 2 versions of deployment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] JBoss BPMS Platform 6 | Reporter: | Zuzana Krejčová <zkrejcov> |
| Component: | Business Central | Assignee: | Mauricio Salatino <msalatin> |
| Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | Pavel Kralik <pkralik> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 6.0.0 | CC: | agiertli, kverlaen, lpetrovi, mbaluch, mswiders, ravindra.tubati, zkrejcov |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2014-11-26 08:02:48 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Zuzana Krejčová
2013-09-17 10:39:34 UTC
Zuzana, I just tried with both ER3 and master(community) and was not able to reproduce the described behavior. Would you mind to check it once again on your end that the right deployments were removed. Maybe a good idea would be to have a hangout quickly where you could show me how to reproduce it. Maybe I am missing something here... (In reply to Maciej Swiderski from comment #1) > Zuzana, I just tried with both ER3 and master(community) and was not able to > reproduce the described behavior. Would you mind to check it once again on > your end that the right deployments were removed. Maybe a good idea would be > to have a hangout quickly where you could show me how to reproduce it. Maybe > I am missing something here... Well. I've reproduced this again. Then started recording another attempt, so that I'd have a short .mpeg for you at least and since then I am unable to reproduce this as well. The only cause for this that seems at least a bit probable is linked with bug 983585 comment 4 - I used save, not autosave, and I'm quite sure the changes got saved, that I got the green message about successful save, but.. who knows. When I tried with no changes made to the process, the results were the same as in this bug. So, if you have 2 deployments with the same process (name, id, version), only one of them is shown in the Process Definitions. Not sure if this is ok. If it is, perhaps we can close this issue and I'll focus on the Designer - whether there is some intermittent problem with 'Save'. I would say then it behaves as expected as we have only process name, id and version as elements that the UI considers and that causes they are not visible - or only one is visible. If we would included another column e.g deployment id then both should be visible. Not sure that we should add another column for that. Most likely different deployments will have independent process id, etc. So my vote is to close this one unless we decide that the current behavior shall be altered. From Prakash: At this point we should move forward with what exists (option 1) with mouse over note that may highlight the difference, I would not be comfortable adding the ids to the table at this point. We need to think through this properly and come up with something that is intuitive to the user. We can tackle that for post 6.0. I believe this can be either marked as modified or as duplicate - see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1167610 that is marked as modified. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1167610 *** |