Branch: refs/heads/dev Home: https://github.com/galaxyproject/galaxy Commit: 355bb281e21e701e05d1f671f080022de9df987b https://github.com/galaxyproject/galaxy/commit/355bb281e21e701e05d1f671f0800... Author: John Chilton jmchilton@gmail.com Date: 2015-12-20 (Sun, 20 Dec 2015)

Changed paths: M lib/galaxy/managers/workflows.py M lib/galaxy/webapps/galaxy/api/workflows.py M lib/galaxy/workflow/run_request.py M test/api/test_workflows.py M test/unit/workflows/test_run_parameters.py

Log Message: ----------- Finish swapping unencoded ids with order_index in workflows API.

Running a workflow or showing a workflow can both restore the previous behavior by passing legacy=True as an API parameter. By changing these two endpoints in tandem I believe backward compatiblity for most existing code should be maintained unless:

- The external application saved these workflow IDs previously and re-runs workflows without refetching the workflow definition. I could imagine Refinery for instance might do this and will have to update indexed workflows or add legacy=True to workflow requests. - The external application contacted the database directly after using this API endpoint to fetch more information about the step (seems unlikely).

See conversation: - http://dev.list.galaxyproject.org/workflow-API-step-order-vs-step-id-in-biob...

Rebased with changes suggested by @nsoranzo.

Commit: 6aa7691a637e86491a51d41a1672521f42a06bb5 https://github.com/galaxyproject/galaxy/commit/6aa7691a637e86491a51d41a16725... Author: Martin Cech cech.marten@gmail.com Date: 2015-12-26 (Sat, 26 Dec 2015)

Changed paths: M lib/galaxy/managers/workflows.py M lib/galaxy/webapps/galaxy/api/workflows.py M lib/galaxy/workflow/run_request.py M test/api/test_workflows.py M test/unit/workflows/test_run_parameters.py

Log Message: ----------- Merge pull request #1137 from jmchilton/workflow_api_order_2

Finish swapping unencoded ids with order_index in workflows API.

Compare: https://github.com/galaxyproject/galaxy/compare/2466b1cb6575...6aa7691a637e