Star Alignment Automation #616
Conversation
* Initial code markers for integration STAR alignment automation
Move SSM parameter retrieval into initialisation so it is accessible for mocking.
| # TODO: need to find sensible data for those. Could be blank to start with and updated once we receive workflow events? | ||
| WFL_ID = "N/A" | ||
| WFV_ID = "N/A" | ||
| WF_VERSION = "N/A" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
With, now, new refactored Workflow constraint made, they become nullable. So, perhaps, leave these 3 out all together..? I will follow up on workflow update side, during even handling.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about the workflow name?
Did we decide to leave it to the "client" or control it from the orchestration?
(naming conventions are not needed here, but may be easier to enforce from the portal side)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For first cut, let us leave it to client, Flo. i.e NF stack job submission Lambda i.e. "facade". After the first spin, we shall regroup and discuss. So, we will go with the convention use there - which is not far too off, IMO...
I am kind of thinking - making direct interface to Batch job submission from Portal, instead of "facade" - which gives us/Portal more control (and, scwatt doesn't need to field any change requests to "facade"). Potentially reduce, sort of, double handling...
No description provided.