On workflow module optimisation

[hyzx86]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

To date, we have collected a number of questions and suggestions for the workflow module
Below I've summarised and collated these encounters, and we've tried to consolidate them into one PR as much as possible, as separating them into different PRs may require multiple changes to the multi-table structure, and may also require the introduction of many destructive updates

Workflow support for versioning, including audit information

• Upgrade workflows diagramming library to a modern digramming ui library Upgrade workflows diagramming library to a modern digramming ui library #16067
• Implement workflow versioning and keep the existing instance upon import Implement workflow versioning and keep the existing instance upon import #15496
• Workflows need audit trail support Workflows need audit trail support #11608

Other enhancements

Workflow Type

• Add title templates to the workflow, like TitlePart does
• Add a Description field to a workflow type，can save text that describes the process.
• Add a DisplayName field for a short description to distinguish it from the technical name.

Workflow Instance

• Add workflow instance title editor for workflow types
• Adding display names to workflow types
• Add ExecutedOnUtc field to workflow instances, which can be used for sorting
• Adding audit information to workflow types, CreatedUtc,ModifiedUtc,ModifiedBy,CreatedBy

If there are any other suggestions, please add them.

Describe the solution you'd like

I am currently trying to implement these changes in PR #16043

[giannik]

@hyzx86 also a description field for the workflow type definition would be usefull (along with display name).

[hyzx86]

@hyzx86 also a description field for the workflow type definition would be usefull (along with display name).

Yes, I agree, it could be used to keep some change logs or business notes or something like that.

[giannik]

@hyzx86 also a description field for the workflow type definition would be usefull (along with display name).

Yes, I agree, it could be used to keep some change logs or business notes or something like that.

Basically from list of workflows to see and remember what it does and the outcomes so you dont have to look into the designer to recall what its doing.

[hyzx86]

Basically from list of workflows to see and remember what it does and the outcomes so you dont have to look into the designer to recall what its doing.

That would be DisplayName. 😁

[giannik]

the display name would :
Display name : Front end Contact form submission
The desription would be :

handles submissions from form http://mysite.com. Sends emails to moderator and integrates with crm bla bla....

Display name is something short and description expands more.

[hyzx86]

Hi @Piedone ，In addition to using x6 as a process designer, we may need a json driven form designer for dynamic form generation, I would recommend amis.
Do we have any limitations or rules regarding the introduction of external packages?

[giannik]

@hyzx86 personally i would not change anything else apart from replacing js plumb with x6 . changing the activity UI forms to depend on a javascript library is not something i would prefer.

[hyzx86]

@hyzx86 personally i would not change anything else apart from replacing js plumb with x6 . changing the activity UI forms to depend on a javascript library is not something i would prefer.

This is not that simple. First of all, our current workflow node editing is based on form submissions, and we want to refactor it to SPA, so we first need to change the way each node is saved from a per-submission to the server to a client-side staging.
In addition, I'd like to enhance the workflow node editing to support multiple methods, like elsa-core workflow, make the Activity Node support plain text, liquid expressions, and js expressions.
My plan is to abstract the process node definitions in c# code, generate a json structure, and then have the front-end components build the required UI.
We can use amis or any other front-end component to generate the edit form.

[giannik]

......., and we want to refactor it to SPA, .....

why have you come to a conclusion that we need to refactor it to a SPA ?

[hyzx86]

why have you come to a conclusion that we need to refactor it to a SPA ?

This is a change based on workflow versioning, as currently every time a workflow node is saved the entire workflow type is directly submitted and saved to the database

[giannik]

and why is that a problem ? just save the entire workflow json and do a diff evalutaion of the changes . content item versioning works the same.

[hyzx86]

Whenever we click on the Save button of a workflow node, a new version of the workflow type is generated, if when you need to create a workflow definition with 20 nodes, then at least 20 versions will be generated

[Piedone]

Hi @Piedone ，In addition to using x6 as a process designer, we may need a json driven form designer for dynamic form generation, I would recommend amis. Do we have any limitations or rules regarding the introduction of external packages?

I don't think we have anything formalized, but I'd say they need to have a license compatible with OC's, actively developed, have a sufficiently high quality, and with everything available in English (as well).

[github-actions]

We triaged this issue and set the milestone according to the priority we think is appropriate (see the docs on how we triage and prioritize issues).

This indicates when the core team may start working on it. However, if you'd like to contribute, we'd warmly welcome you to do that anytime. See our guide on contributions here.