Local Activity Testing Variables

[ByronMayne]

Enhancement Request

Proposed Enhancement

Describe the enhancement you'd like
With the new test activity feature it is possible to provide some unit test values for variables for workflows. This feature is very useful when it comes to testing individual activities. The downside to this feature is the variables are stored on the workflow themselves, which means if multiple users are using the tests they will conflict. The enhancement is to provide a method to store test variables that are scoped to a user. This is useful for debug variables like an email address. We would also need a method to be able to edit the variables

Alternative Solutions

Describe alternatives you've considered
Right now there is no way to do this with what currently exists. The only option would be to use the REST api and call it directly.

Use Cases

Identify potential use cases
This is useful for projects that have multiple people working on the same workflows.

Impact of Enhancement

Explain the potential impact
It would improve productivity of development of workflows allowing users to test out activities without constantly overriding each others values.

Visuals and Mockups

Provide any visuals
If you have sketches, wireframes, mockups, or any visual representation of your proposed enhancement, please attach them. Visuals can help convey your ideas more clearly and can be very persuasive in the evaluation process.

Additional Context

Add any other context
Where this local preferences are stored in up for debate. Ideally they are stored locally because they could contain secret information. Because the agent could be running on a shared central server we can't depend on saving the values on the local file system. There are a few options

1. Store the values in the browser storage, this is scoped per user. The downside is if the test api is used from somewhere else these values will not be used.
2. Store them in the central database, but encoded with protected data. This stops the issue of them exposing secrets but just adds a lot of noise and requires more api to be created for CRUD operations.

[ByronMayne]

@sfmskywalker would it make sense for the variables to be only applied if triggered from the studio itself? This is a much simpler approach as we can just store them in the browser storage, but I am not sure if you would think this would be a disadvantage because the results would be different when using the REST api from another source.

[sfmskywalker]

That could work, but the advantage of storing the test values centrally is that it opens the door for automated testing down the road.