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
I have done some experimenting around this front (and may also attempt to tackle depending on availability). There are some ambiguities in the serverless workflow spec (e.g. for OAI functions, how does one specify body param name from the function ref) and there is currently a lack conformance suite to ensure accuracy.
While it may seem daunting, I would recommend:
During development gather ambiguities and open issues for them
Have the ability to transform a serverless workflow spec into a "prepared" form (i.e. validation, third party asset load, etc)
Have two types of workflows registrations:
One that already has the workflow loaded and prepared worker side before registration, and only executes on the prepared one
One that accepts a full workflow spec and args and sends off to an activity to "prepare" the workflow, and then executes right there
Build conformance suite as part of development. I know this seems non-trivial, but really just a set of YAMLs, inputs, mocked HTTP req/resp, and expected outputs shouldn't be too hard. The key is to not make it Go specific.
That would rock. Yes, let's figure out what's missing/can be improved and add it. Some work on TCK and conformance has started there but still early stage.
Seem to be a number of companies that are working on running serverless workflow dsl, most on top of Temporal. Having these communities work together would benefit everyone imo.
Author:
Summary of the feature being proposed
Adding support to use serverlessworkflow definitions as DSL for temporal
What value does this feature bring to Temporal?
we can use existing systems and tooling to create DSL to work on temporal
Are you willing to implement this feature yourself?
Yes im willing to work on creating an implemention for the serverless workflow to work with the GO-SDK
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: