Anton Gilgur

You also might be able to workaround it by removing the managed namespace flag of the Server and make it cluster-level, but keep its RBAC only for the managed namespace....

There is an example of this already: https://argo-workflows.readthedocs.io/en/latest/walk-through/scripts-and-results/ Did that not suffice?

`script` is basically just short-hand for a variant that uses a `container`. Your titles and descriptions also don't mention needing to use `container` vs. `script`, they only mention using `result`,...

Ah I see what you mean, since "Scripts and Results" introduces `result` but does not really explain it... it's explained in the next page in "Output Parameters". Thanks for elaborating....

Curious, is there any reason for this tool to exist as part of the core Argo repo? It sounds like it would work perfectly fine as its own separate tool,...

> Based on my analysis in [#11159 (comment)](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/issues/11159#issuecomment-2066761200), since we don't know the mode of the `command` beforehand, I think this might still be a correct change; some `command`s will...

So the default case of this should have been fixed by #11016. It will be broken if you're using `POD_NAMES=v1` though. > It seems to happen because the annotation is...

> the other location seems to have been indeed missed per [#6982 (comment)](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-workflows/pull/6982#discussion_r1574356857). > The annotation shouldn't add much of any time I wrote up a fix for the annotation...

A quick search on [all appearances of `.then` in the UI](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aargoproj%2Fargo-workflows+%22.then%22+path%3Aui%2F&type=code) showed mostly correct async code. There was one case that was parallelized and async with a render, but not...

@shuangkun do you or @AlbeeSo plan to update this PR with the requested changes? No changes have been made in 4 days since you re-opened the PR, so I'm not...