3 ms·

Very true. We really should stop overloading the term Workflow in software. As of now these are the broad categories that abuse the term workflow. 1. State Ma

Very true. We really should stop overloading the term Workflow in software. As of now these are the broad categories that abuse the term workflow. 1. State Machines For example in Jira a bug/ticket moves through different states to reach a final stage. This type of state-machines can be found in a lot of different softwares - most CMS/bug-trackers/CRMs where the entity is different (document/bug/lead). The motive of these systems who call themselves as workflow engines - is to provide a structure to an otherwise ad-hoc movement of entities so that a lead/manager is able to ensure a process and collect statistics. 2. Automations For example "apple workflow" app or Zapier or Zoho Flow. These softwares define a sequence of steps that are triggered when an event occurs in the system. The motive of these systems are to enable automation and integrations between different software components with zero code (thus, no-code). 3. Process Designers (Bad term but can't think of anything better at the moment) For example Airflow/Camunda. These systems are not necessarily low-code but they mostly deal with arranging individual components of code such that a process can be assembled as quickly as possible. These systems usually are accompanied by a visual designer like what Zapier has, but the intentions are mostly to ease out the process, than being a complete no-code tool to create automations. However, their marketing tries to sell themselves as no-code platform for business folks. The motive is not yet very clear to me but from my initial intuition they can be used to initiate some data-processing pipeline, I guess? If anybody can throw more clarity, please leave a reply. Now as you can see, much like how a "Process" can mean many things in many different context, the term "Workflow" can mean a lot depending on the context. Any software that calls itself the ultimate workflow solution is just a lie. It's like calling something an "ultimate process engine" - doesn't make sense.

mfateev 6y ago
Which bucket temporal.io and Azure Durable Functions that support `workflow as code` do fall into?
Grimm1 6y ago
"However, their marketing tries to sell themselves as no-code platform for business folks." Huh? I've never seen Airflow described as no code or tried to sell itself that way, in fact all the pipelines are written in python and you can do some really complex orchestration. I get you're not saying Airflow is no code but that the category you've put it in is typically low code or marketed as low code, but then I don't think Airflow belongs in that category or rather, and maybe more accurately, no/low code is not really a major defining quality of the bucket you're calling "Process Designers". I've also been calling them "Process Schedulers" because typically it involves translating a more manual, but well defined process into it's automated phase.
- newcrobuzon 6y ago
  I would agree. The no-code is an illusion in the enterprise realm - before you know it, you are waist deep in the custom code. No-code can really work only for small businesses imo. I come from enterprise background and that is one of the reasons I built Titanoboa - to make something that makes it easy to rapidly prototype new integrations on the fly. I summed up some of my thoughts on this topic here: https://www.titanoboa.io/repl.html https://www.titanoboa.io/repl.html The main point I am trying to test with Titanoboa is this however: State Machines <-> Process Designers is a spectrum and one product could handle the entire spectrum (or part of it). Titanoboa makes it possible to pre-define workflow steps and make it "no code" while also making complex custom integrations possible from the same environment with the same concepts. Plus also distributed data handling is in the mix. I guess now the challenge is how to market this versatility or whether it could create more confusion...
  - neeleshs 6y ago
    This is not true in many use cases. There are tons of ways to handle low code/no code. It is a very hard problem to solve, and vendors end up building basic "low-code" wrappers around API endpoints, and that's why it looks like a lost cause. Done right, (we are a living proof it can be done, at Syncari), one can do a lot of stuff done without any coding
    - newcrobuzon 6y ago
      Do you have any links to some blog posts discussing it (the "doing it right" approach)? I would agree that it definitely depends on the use case. I will definitely check out Syncari - just opened the landing page and it looks great!
      - neeleshs 6y ago
        Thanks! Haven't had a chance to write a lot about this (heads down building and selling), but https://syncari.com/a-brief-history-of-todays-data-woes-and-why-a-radical-rethinking-is-the-only-way-forward/ https://syncari.com/a-brief-history-of-todays-data-woes-and-... touches on it a bit. For us, it is about: * implementing deep integrations that are commonplace * not spraying too thin in the quest of supporting hundreds of systems * thinking from a data model/data/eventually consistent system perspective * completely dropping the reactive/trigger based/if-this-then-that point-to-point model.
zacwest 6y ago
I'd like you to listen to this file, which is your first 'headline' read by `say`: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fanpqs8lv2d9nvl/say.m4a?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/fanpqs8lv2d9nvl/say.m4a?dl=0 Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a vision-impaired person relying on a technology like VoiceOver. Do you understand how unbelievably frustrating that is?
- lewisjoe 6y ago
  Thanks for pointing this out. Never knew this would break screen readers. Sorry. I'm changing the font right now.
- samstave 6y ago
  >Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a vision-impaired person relying on a technology like VoiceOver —- Yeah - thats “frustrating” for like what, ‘dozens’? As opposed to just the other problems in the world that dwarf this? Now imagine you are a % of the population of the globe who actually requires this to be a thought. Yeah - personally, i see this as a statistical straw-man. Sure, why dont you imagine yourself as a gay queer trans java programmer from ohio that moved to silicon valley for more acceptance and is going to try to make it in FAANG based on the fact that youre gay queer trans as opposed to say, your ability and then blame people on the hostility of the environment to you because you choose to only wear naturally harvested wool and eat kale. Yeah, nobody gives a shit. Either be a good person and do good work, or GTFO - nobody really cares about anything else.
  - RussianCow 6y ago
    What is your point? zacwest isn't asking them to completely rewrite the page—the problem they pointed out is trivial to solve and simply needed to be recognized. If you can spend 20 minutes to drastically improve the usability of your product for "dozens" of users, why wouldn't you?
    - samstave 6y ago
      I am not saying it is bad. I was just commenting that the scale is offset. Get it?

mfateev 6y ago

Which bucket temporal.io and Azure Durable Functions that support `workflow as code` do fall into?

Grimm1 6y ago

"However, their marketing tries to sell themselves as no-code platform for business folks." Huh? I've never seen Airflow described as no code or tried to sell itself that way, in fact all the pipelines are written in python and you can do some really complex orchestration. I get you're not saying Airflow is no code but that the category you've put it in is typically low code or marketed as low code, but then I don't think Airflow belongs in that category or rather, and maybe more accurately, no/low code is not really a major defining quality of the bucket you're calling "Process Designers". I've also been calling them "Process Schedulers" because typically it involves translating a more manual, but well defined process into it's automated phase.

newcrobuzon 6y ago
I would agree. The no-code is an illusion in the enterprise realm - before you know it, you are waist deep in the custom code. No-code can really work only for small businesses imo. I come from enterprise background and that is one of the reasons I built Titanoboa - to make something that makes it easy to rapidly prototype new integrations on the fly. I summed up some of my thoughts on this topic here: https://www.titanoboa.io/repl.html https://www.titanoboa.io/repl.html The main point I am trying to test with Titanoboa is this however: State Machines <-> Process Designers is a spectrum and one product could handle the entire spectrum (or part of it). Titanoboa makes it possible to pre-define workflow steps and make it "no code" while also making complex custom integrations possible from the same environment with the same concepts. Plus also distributed data handling is in the mix. I guess now the challenge is how to market this versatility or whether it could create more confusion...
- neeleshs 6y ago
  This is not true in many use cases. There are tons of ways to handle low code/no code. It is a very hard problem to solve, and vendors end up building basic "low-code" wrappers around API endpoints, and that's why it looks like a lost cause. Done right, (we are a living proof it can be done, at Syncari), one can do a lot of stuff done without any coding
  - newcrobuzon 6y ago
    Do you have any links to some blog posts discussing it (the "doing it right" approach)? I would agree that it definitely depends on the use case. I will definitely check out Syncari - just opened the landing page and it looks great!
    - neeleshs 6y ago
      Thanks! Haven't had a chance to write a lot about this (heads down building and selling), but https://syncari.com/a-brief-history-of-todays-data-woes-and-why-a-radical-rethinking-is-the-only-way-forward/ https://syncari.com/a-brief-history-of-todays-data-woes-and-... touches on it a bit. For us, it is about: * implementing deep integrations that are commonplace * not spraying too thin in the quest of supporting hundreds of systems * thinking from a data model/data/eventually consistent system perspective * completely dropping the reactive/trigger based/if-this-then-that point-to-point model.

zacwest 6y ago

I'd like you to listen to this file, which is your first 'headline' read by `say`: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fanpqs8lv2d9nvl/say.m4a?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/fanpqs8lv2d9nvl/say.m4a?dl=0 Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a vision-impaired person relying on a technology like VoiceOver. Do you understand how unbelievably frustrating that is?

lewisjoe 6y ago
Thanks for pointing this out. Never knew this would break screen readers. Sorry. I'm changing the font right now.
samstave 6y ago
>Now imagine yourself in the shoes of a vision-impaired person relying on a technology like VoiceOver —- Yeah - thats “frustrating” for like what, ‘dozens’? As opposed to just the other problems in the world that dwarf this? Now imagine you are a % of the population of the globe who actually requires this to be a thought. Yeah - personally, i see this as a statistical straw-man. Sure, why dont you imagine yourself as a gay queer trans java programmer from ohio that moved to silicon valley for more acceptance and is going to try to make it in FAANG based on the fact that youre gay queer trans as opposed to say, your ability and then blame people on the hostility of the environment to you because you choose to only wear naturally harvested wool and eat kale. Yeah, nobody gives a shit. Either be a good person and do good work, or GTFO - nobody really cares about anything else.
- RussianCow 6y ago
  What is your point? zacwest isn't asking them to completely rewrite the page—the problem they pointed out is trivial to solve and simply needed to be recognized. If you can spend 20 minutes to drastically improve the usability of your product for "dozens" of users, why wouldn't you?
  - samstave 6y ago
    I am not saying it is bad. I was just commenting that the scale is offset. Get it?