Process visualizer seems incorrect

[Cheong Chung Onn]

Hi Paul,

I have a process graph appears to be incorrect and I also have created
the "expected" visualized process (process1.png) to help highlight the
problem area. Graph.png is the PD graph, and the Process.png is the
actual output from Sarasvati and Process1.png is the output I created
using Gimp.

The workflow scenario is as follow - at Node 5, the task is "rejected"
and it is forwarded to Node 3.

I also have updated the TestRejectNodeProcessVisualizer testcase to
reflect this scenario.

Regards
chungonn

[Paul Lorenz]

I'll try and take a look at this in the next couple of days.

Out of curiosity, are you interested in the editor. It's mostly usable
except for a couple of features (no externals support and can't delete
nodes). If you're interested, take a look, I'd be happy to get some
feedback on it.

cheers,
Paul

[Cheong Chung Onn]

Hi Paul,

I am interested in the editor and I did take a look some time back. My
first impression then was still lots of work need to be done and I could
see you have invested much effort already. I consciously avoid using
external workflow so having these features missing in the editor does
not bother me a bit. I would check out the latest version and test
drive it later in the week.

Have a good week ahead.

Cheers!
chung-onn

[Paul Lorenz]

Hi chung-onn,
I fixed the issue by making more use of isBackArc. I hope this fix
doesn't cause any other issues :) Let me know if the fix looks good to
you.

The editor has been progressing rapidly. The last things it needs
before I would consider it fully functional is support for selecting
nodes for delete or moving nodes sets and implementing the process
definition library. I'm hoping to have those done next week some time.

cheers,
Paul

[Cheong Chung Onn]

Hi Paul,

Please find my in-line response below.

Paul Lorenz wrote:
> Hi chung-onn,
> I fixed the issue by making more use of isBackArc. I hope this fix
> doesn't cause any other issues :) Let me know if the fix looks good to
> you.
>

It looks Perfect! Thanks a million! :)

> The editor has been progressing rapidly. The last things it needs
> before I would consider it fully functional is support for selecting
> nodes for delete or moving nodes sets and implementing the process
> definition library. I'm hoping to have those done next week some time.
>

I apologize for unable to find time to look into the editor still and I
was planning to do it tmr instead. After reading your email i felt
compelled to do so ;), on the whole, it is very functional except there
are some kinks to work out - esp an NPE.. I will post my findings in a
separate thread.

Cheers!
chungonn