Closed 17tmh closed 2 years ago
As I pointed out previously, substates work as expected, and there were no changes to the state machine required. The unit test was only added to verify. And Automatonymous 5.1.3 is the latest version.
Sorry, I really don't want to waste your time. One last try.
From your answer I read the following: You're saying that substates work as expected in Automatonymous 5.1.3. (Tell me if I misunderstood)
But then I wonder why the unit test from my pull request fails. The test should be correct, after all it is the same as the one you wrote for https://github.com/phatboyg/MassTransit/commit/80511d062d3f10b2ef605b767c011b784bfa580f
Anyway, thank you very much for your answers. Already learned a lot.
Seems there was an issue in the code, which I fixed. Though I haven't no idea when I might release it.
@phatboyg Just want to point out, that the unit test (with small adjustments) from https://github.com/phatboyg/MassTransit/commit/80511d062d3f10b2ef605b767c011b784bfa580f is actually failing here, which shows my original problem in https://github.com/MassTransit/MassTransit/issues/3134
I can see that this is fixed in MassTransit v8. But since I wanted to use Automatonymous independently in an app not actually using MassTransit (I just a need a good state machine engine, nothing else), I think that integrating MassTransit v8 just for the state machine would be wrong and probably confusing (
MassTransitStateMachine
seems to be very very entangled with Sags etc.).As I understood you, the problem will not be fixed in this repo. Since the unit test passes with Automatonymous 5.0.2, I am asking myself if using this version could be a solution for me.