This is awesome - I want to get this merged. I need it for a project 😆. What can I do to help?

There is a lot of really solid little fixes and refactorings in here - if I can try to preserve your commit authorship do you mind if I rebase some smaller pieces out an merge them ahead of the big PR?

This is awesome - I want to get this merged. I need it for a project laughing. What can I do to help?

There is a lot of really solid little fixes and refactorings in here - if I can try to preserve your commit authorship do you mind if I rebase some smaller pieces out an merge them ahead of the big PR?

Hi @jmchilton, yes, don't feel you need to wait for me.

That said, I think I'm mostly done here. I still need to write some tests and documentation, but at least the latter can be done in another PR.

Okay, the tests I wrote are passing; failures are the same as #1093 (comment).

@jmchilton, I've taken this out of WIP if that's ok with you?

We can also do it the way you suggested and keep this one as WIP if you prefer.

Hey @jmchilton - sorry to bother you, but you said you were keen to get this merged. Could I get a review here - or is there anything else you'd like me to work on first?

What do you think about these abstractions 693da35.

I haven't tested it - but I really prefer this abstraction around the runnable. I think it prevents adding specialized attributes to runnables that don't need it (e.g. workflow_dict) and cleans up operations like fetching the workflow_id from a runnable. If you can make something like that commit work I'll definitely merge this. At all the other levels - I really love everything about this PR.

Thanks for that commit @jmchilton, I agree that that looks a lot nicer than my runnable.workflow_id solution. It seems to be working fine, after a bit of tinkering.

Thanks so much, this is awesome. And thanks for cleaning up that commit.

Thanks for the merge!