Comment 17 for bug 1302576

Hey Roderick.

I agree that we could implement a different behavior on what to do with the "job definition has changed" exception. While I was writing that I wrote that we could do a lot more here but at the time just being able to detect the situation and reject further processing is the safest thing we can do that would prevent us from chasing "impossible" results that got created by running half of the session with one version of some provider and another half with another that are somehow incompatible.

If we want to we can continue discussing what the user interface should be there or if that exception should be less strict (or what that would mean at least).