You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Given jobs can lay in the system for a while the conditions on the job should reflect its current state. Currently, we have JobRunning and JobComplete where 'Complete' represents success. However, we don't transition JobRunning to 'False' once its finished which creates for a confusing API.
It would be useful to reflect the state of the job more accurately and be consistent with other fields on jobs that indicate the job has finished.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I got to thinking. Perhaps JobRunning isn't right. Perhaps JobStarted is what we need because then it doesn't need updating. This is more how conditions are meant to be used unlike the current configuration that implies a state machine (not what conditions are for).
Given jobs can lay in the system for a while the conditions on the job should reflect its current state. Currently, we have
JobRunning
andJobComplete
where 'Complete' represents success. However, we don't transitionJobRunning
to 'False' once its finished which creates for a confusing API.It would be useful to reflect the state of the job more accurately and be consistent with other fields on jobs that indicate the job has finished.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: