Okay to tag alpha3 ?

[Cantor, Scott]

On 10/28/14, 11:34 AM, "Tom Zeller" <tzeller at dragonacea.biz> wrote:

>> I had to "fix" (in an interim form) the error handling in the intercept
>> flow when I ported the attribute checker in, so you may have to look at
>> whether I broke something until we get the consent flows cleaned up.
>
>Thanks. I had been confused about the error handling. The integration
>tests are testing the consent flows minus revocation and they are
>still passing.

I had to fix them, but I did that by tweaking the error event they were
using to match one that's already in the abstract flow.

The problem here that isn't as true with authn or c14n is that the set of
event IDs is more open because of user extension, in order to use the
message.properties trick and error.vm to do the view for you (or route to
a different view).

Like with mine, I generalized the attribute-check flow I did as a
"context-check" intercept flow, meaning it "examines the
ProfileRequestContext and either signals proceed or ContextCheckFailed".

So, I have to make ContextCheckFailed a valid end state for both my flow,
but also your intercept master flow. There's no way to wildcard that,
unless we put the "real event" into a property of some other common event
or create our own layer underneath flow events, etc. I would rather not do
that.

But right now, the abstract flow is in system/. I tried to do a two level
inherit with a parent flow in user, but that doesn't work, turns out SWF
only allows one level of flow inheritance. So I'm still thinking.

-- Scott