Optional persistence of step data on flow back transition

[linxlad]

Added optional class property and logic for step data persistence if the flow is transitioned backwards. If persistence on backwards transition is enabled and the current request transition is 'back' then persist the current step data to storage.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-1.1%) to 98.626% when pulling 12f3046 on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[linxlad]

Please see gif recording of this PR in action:
http://cl.ly/gMHA

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.1%) to 97.651% when pulling 3ef1d60 on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[Filoz]

Hi,
great! :)
I think you should also add a "set" and "is" method for the persistOnBackTransition variable, like revalidatePreviousSteps has setRevalidatePreviousSteps and isRevalidatePreviousSteps

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.1%) to 97.651% when pulling 0e3e148 on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.1%) to 97.651% when pulling 0e3e148 on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[linxlad]

@Filoz Thanks for the suggestion. I have added those methods :)

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.1%) to 97.651% when pulling 0e3e148 on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-1.9%) to 97.847% when pulling b819d27 on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.3%) to 97.407% when pulling 066357d on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.3%) to 97.407% when pulling 066357d on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.3%) to 97.407% when pulling 066357d on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-2.3%) to 97.407% when pulling 066357d on linxlad:master into 551482e on craue:master.

[linxlad]

@craue Does this look ok? :)

[linxlad]

@craue Been nearly 6 months now. Is this git abandoned?

[craue]

Is this git abandoned?

@linxlad, as you can see from the commit history, it is not. 😏

I'm still trying to implement transitions (#67), which would be a more flexible approach than this one. Furthermore, tests are completely missing here.

[TerjeBr]

Please, can we have this pull request?
It is a very useful feature I also want.

[linxlad]

@craue This one fits with what you currently code and I am unsure of how #67 would solve the persistence of data on stepping back?

[craue]

Still, there are no tests covering this functionality, so I cannot merge it yet.