Skip to content

Document root workflow namespace omission - #1808

Closed
yuandrew wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/root-workflow-namespace
Closed

Document root workflow namespace omission#1808
yuandrew wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/root-workflow-namespace

Conversation

@yuandrew

@yuandrew yuandrew commented Sep 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What was changed

Document that root workflow execution information omits its namespace. The root namespace may differ for cross-namespace child workflows and must be tracked separately.

Why?

Completes the documentation requirement from temporalio/features#605.

Checklist

  1. Closes

  2. How was this tested:

  1. Any docs updates needed?

Note

Low Risk
Docstring-only changes with no behavioral impact on the SDK.

Overview
Expands API docstrings so callers know root workflow execution info does not include the root’s namespace. For cross-namespace child workflows, that namespace can differ from the current workflow’s namespace and must be tracked separately.

On the client side, WorkflowExecution.root_id and root_run_id now note that the root namespace is not retained. In workflow code, the same guidance appears on Info.root, RootInfo, and contrasts with ParentInfo, which still exposes parent namespace.

No runtime or type changes—documentation only, aligned with temporalio/features#605.

Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 2d48bb8. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.

Root execution data omits the namespace, which may differ for
cross-namespace child workflows. Warn users to retain it separately.
@yuandrew
yuandrew requested a review from a team as a code owner September 2, 2026 14:48
@yuandrew yuandrew changed the title Document root workflow namespace omission - #568 Document root workflow namespace omission Sep 2, 2026
@yuandrew yuandrew closed this Sep 2, 2026
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.

1 participant