{"push_id":915635531,"size":2,"distinct_size":2,"ref":"refs/heads/dev","head":"6aa7691a637e86491a51d41a1672521f42a06bb5","before":"2466b1cb65757b0157dab67a16c7bbfd7b48c710","commits":[{"sha":"355bb281e21e701e05d1f671f080022de9df987b","author":{"email":"e361bfc8c8526c02f5efd3e71aa466615402f28f@gmail.com","name":"John Chilton"},"message":"Finish swapping unencoded ids with order_index in workflows API.\n\nRunning 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:\n\n - 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.\n - The external application contacted the database directly after using this API endpoint to fetch more information about the step (seems unlikely).\n\nSee conversation:\n - http://dev.list.galaxyproject.org/workflow-API-step-order-vs-step-id-in-bioblend-td4668367.html\n\nRebased with changes suggested by @nsoranzo.","distinct":true,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/galaxyproject/galaxy/commits/355bb281e21e701e05d1f671f080022de9df987b"},{"sha":"6aa7691a637e86491a51d41a1672521f42a06bb5","author":{"email":"053c54453803f06a3e5ef64f10064f25a1471150@gmail.com","name":"Martin Cech"},"message":"Merge pull request #1137 from jmchilton/workflow_api_order_2\n\nFinish swapping unencoded ids with order_index in workflows API.","distinct":true,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/galaxyproject/galaxy/commits/6aa7691a637e86491a51d41a1672521f42a06bb5"}]}