Currently, SWF requires that a flow's messages are co-located with the flow definition XML file. This is problematic.
I have an application where the users fret about every word presented in the UI and change messages regularly but don't ask for many changes to the actual flow or coding.
As things currently stand, I have to repackage the jar and redeploy for every wording change, no matter how trivial. This is a PITA for me 'cos the host organisation's bureaucracy is mind-boggling. If I could claim that "it's just a message file change", it would be treated in a much more relaxed manner.
Ideally, when resolving messages, SWF would use the same sort of configuration heirarchy as seen in Spring Boot, eg: system properties -> global files -> specified packaged files -> default location.
Alpheratz opened SWF-1747 and commented
Currently, SWF requires that a flow's messages are co-located with the flow definition XML file. This is problematic.
I have an application where the users fret about every word presented in the UI and change messages regularly but don't ask for many changes to the actual flow or coding.
As things currently stand, I have to repackage the jar and redeploy for every wording change, no matter how trivial. This is a PITA for me 'cos the host organisation's bureaucracy is mind-boggling. If I could claim that "it's just a message file change", it would be treated in a much more relaxed manner.
Ideally, when resolving messages, SWF would use the same sort of configuration heirarchy as seen in Spring Boot, eg: system properties -> global files -> specified packaged files -> default location.
Affects: 2.5.1