microsoft / microsoft/agent-framework-durable-extension
.NET: Define supported durable history ownership transitions
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 16
- Forks
- 10
- Avg merge
- 3d 9h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 9
Description
Follow-up to #95.
Define whether a durable operation may transition from entity-owned history to service-owned history after execution has begun, including:
- mailbox and delivery evidence requirements;
- treatment of locally staged request/response entries;
- remote execution followed by local commit failure;
- whether transition is rejected, explicitly migrated, or otherwise sealed atomically.
Until the design is agreed, callers should not rely on dynamic ownership transitions as a supported scenario. This issue covers both current review findings on #95.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with follow-up #95 and its current review findings. Examine the four listed transition cases—evidence, staged entries, remote execution with local commit failure, and atomic sealing—and document the agreed policy. Done means supported and rejected transitions are explicit; no implementation file or test is named in this issue.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- csharp
- Domain
- distributed-systems
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Active
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100