Skip to content

#BE8480 - Workflow to Integration Updates#1179

Open
SarpBakis23 wants to merge 5 commits intodevelopfrom
feature/be-8480
Open

#BE8480 - Workflow to Integration Updates#1179
SarpBakis23 wants to merge 5 commits intodevelopfrom
feature/be-8480

Conversation

@SarpBakis23
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Updated workflows related URLs to build-integration. Fixed broken links and added redirects

@SarpBakis23 SarpBakis23 requested a review from dbaturac March 12, 2026 16:09
@SarpBakis23 SarpBakis23 self-assigned this Mar 12, 2026
@SarpBakis23 SarpBakis23 added the Draft Draft PR label Mar 12, 2026
@netlify
Copy link
Copy Markdown

netlify bot commented Mar 12, 2026

Deploy Preview for reverent-galileo-8ef035 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 50452c0
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/reverent-galileo-8ef035/deploys/69ba759284759b0008a338b5
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-1179--reverent-galileo-8ef035.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

@SarpBakis23 SarpBakis23 removed the request for review from dbaturac March 12, 2026 16:09
@SarpBakis23 SarpBakis23 removed the Draft Draft PR label Mar 12, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@cagkanaksunyuksel cagkanaksunyuksel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please wait for my approval.

@cagkanaksunyuksel
Copy link
Copy Markdown

PR Review Comment — Conceptual Framework for "Workflow" vs "Integration"

Before reviewing specific changes, it's worth establishing a clear definition for both terms — because this PR applies the rename too broadly in some places, and not broadly enough in others.


Conceptual Framework

Based on reviewing the current production docs and how Bitrise (a comparable platform) handles this distinction:

Workflow → The container. A sequence of steps that defines how an app is built, executed top to bottom. This maps directly to the Workflow Editor, the pipeline structure, and the build configuration. This term should be kept wherever it refers to this concept.

✅ "Add this step to your workflow."
✅ "Steps will be executed in the order defined in the workflow."
✅ "You can clone or edit your workflow in the editor."

Integration → A specific step that connects Appcircle to a third-party service (Firebase, Jira, Slack, BrowserStack, Testinium, etc.). The "Build Integrations" section is essentially the catalog of these connectors. This is where the original terminology problem lived — these were being documented as generic "workflow steps" when they are specifically third-party integrations.

✅ "Add the Firebase App Distribution integration to your workflow."
✅ "The Jira Comment integration supports both Cloud and On-Prem."
✅ "Browse available Build Integrations in the catalog."

Note: Not every step is an integration. Git Clone, Android Build, Xcode Build for Devices, Export Build Artifacts are core build steps — calling them "integrations" would be inaccurate. The term "integration" should apply specifically to steps that represent a connection to an external service or tool.


Issues with the Current PR

🔴 Over-replacement: "Workflow" removed where it should stay

The PR replaces "workflow" in contexts where it refers to the pipeline/container concept, which is incorrect. These should remain as "workflow":

<!-- These are fine as-is — "workflow" here means the pipeline structure -->
...steps defined in the [workflow](/build-integrations)...
...use the below Custom Script as a replacement of the default Android Build step. Remove [...] steps from your workflow.
...the [workflow](/build-integrations) should also have an Install Certificates & Profiles step.

The link target can point to /build-integrations for discoverability, but the anchor text should not contradict the concept. Or better, these inline [workflow] links should simply point back to the Workflow Editor docs, not to the integrations catalog.

🔴 Broken Redirect Targets in netlify.toml

Many to = values still carry old path segments, pointing to non-existent URLs:

to = "/build-integrations/common-workflow-steps/custom-script"
# should be: /build-integrations/common-integrations/custom-script

to = "/build-integrations/android-specific-workflow-steps/android-sign"
# should be: /build-integrations/android-specific-integrations/android-sign

to = "/build-integrations/ios-specific-workflow-steps/firebase-upload-dsym"
# should be: /build-integrations/ios-specific-integrations/firebase-upload-dsym

A full audit of all to = values in the redirect block is needed.

🟡 ContentRef Labels Not Updated

URLs were updated but visible labels still say "Workflows":

<ContentRef url="/build-integrations">What are Workflows and How to Use Them?</ContentRef>
<ContentRef url="/build-integrations/react-native-specific-integrations">React Native Specific Workflow Steps</ContentRef>

If the destination page is now titled around "Integrations", the label should match.

🟡 Core Build Steps Mislabeled as Integrations

Steps like Git Clone, Android Build, Export Build Artifacts, Select Java Version are not third-party integrations — they are native build steps. Grouping their documentation under "Build Integrations" flattens a meaningful distinction. Consider whether these belong under a separate "Build Steps" section or are explicitly called out as "core steps" vs "integrations" within the same section.

Recommendation

The goal of this change — using "integration" where Appcircle connects to a third-party service — is correct. The execution needs two adjustments:

Don't replace "workflow" where it refers to the pipeline structure. These are not the same concept and shouldn't point to the same destination.
Fix the netlify.toml redirect targets before merging — these are broken in production from day one.
The ContentRef label updates and core-step categorization can be addressed in a follow-up.

@SarpBakis23

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants