Replies: 4 comments
-
We have similar issues - the graphs don't seem to have the use case of reusable workflows in mind, and most of our jobs are using them. This makes the graph not very useful as you can't clearly see the names. If you could have some way of customising this so that you could support longer names or even hiding the parent 'folder' name in the graph that would be great. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
🕒 Discussion Activity Reminder 🕒 This Discussion has been labeled as dormant by an automated system for having no activity in the last 60 days. Please consider one the following actions: 1️⃣ Close as Out of Date: If the topic is no longer relevant, close the Discussion as 2️⃣ Provide More Information: Share additional details or context — or let the community know if you've found a solution on your own. 3️⃣ Mark a Reply as Answer: If your question has been answered by a reply, mark the most helpful reply as the solution. Note: This dormant notification will only apply to Discussions with the Thank you for helping bring this Discussion to a resolution! 💬 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yep we use nesting of jobs and it becomes an increasingly unreadable graph. Hopefully, some fixes or configurations will be considered to adjust this. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Select Topic Area
Product Feedback
Body
I have a workflow calling a workflow with multiple jobs and each job calls a reusable workflow. The workflow graph (attached) does not show the name of the jobs on second workflow, instead puts "...". This makes my jobs/activities in the graph non-descriptive, each shows as if the same. There should be a way of specifying what the activity/job text should be. Also, do not rename with middle workflows with "...".
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions