Remove suppport for multipe state machines about transitions

[troessner]

There's already a feature branch for it: https://github.com/troessner/transitions/tree/remove_support_for_multiple_state_machines

[qoobaa]

I believe it's an important feature to define multiple state machines on a single object. It's a lot better to have a few separate state machines, than a single big.

[troessner]

It's a lot better to have a few separate state machines, than a single big.

That I agree 100% with. I am not advocating having a huge state machine, I am advocating to have different models for different concerns.

I remember we had this discussion already.
However, you didn't address my arguments from above:

Regarding (1):

Back then you cited: https://github.com/qoobaa/pioneers/blob/master/app/models/game.rb as an example where multiple state machines per model made sense. However, looking at the model, I can see that it is huge: Almost 500 lines. Static code analysis tools like reek clearly detect this as a code smell.

( $ ) reek app/models/game.rb
Game has at least 31 methods (LargeClass)

If you split up that model into several models (which it should be), I doubt that you would need multiple state machines.
Can you give me one example with one small and self-contained model which passes smell tests where multiple state machines make sense?
Because I have yet to see one.

Regarding (2)

As I said, the notion of having multiple state machines is not clearly expressed in the API, or better said: Not at all.
Also there are a lot of questions regarding the semantics, see my arguments from above.