AW: [jbpm-dev] BPMcenter interesting links

[Tom Baeyens]

Check at the bottom of the page.  It says "Last updated: 05/19/05."  :-)

But now seriously:

Workflow patterns is nice background information, but (as many things in BPM) takes a 
lot of interpretation in order to claim you support it.

The first version of the patterns contained vague descriptions.  After I came to the 
PVM concept, I went there and tried to explain him how on our framework, we could 
just code any behaviour that we wanted (as long as process instance runtime state 
structure could support it).  He didn't get that and only pushed to supply concrete 
executable processes and their behaviour so that he could evaluate.

So I started with supplying them unit tests on the first workflow pattern and then 
asking whether they acknowledged the support for this pattern.  They didn't really 
acknowledge how we supplied just snippets of a unit test and they didn't want to read 
the semantics that way.  Also I felt that they don't consider you to be a real bpm 
system if you don't have persistence.  For some of the patterns like deferred choice 
they sayd something like "3 tasks should be offered to participants and when the 
first participant takes the task..." which implies a lot of infrastructure around the 
plain control flow.  That's where it became too fuzzy for me.

I didn't have a new look to their second version of the patterns for which they have 
claimed to have solved the vagueness critique.

In summary: It is good to check jPDL against the patterns and get some inspiration 
from that.  Probably between the last alpha and the first beta release, that could be 
a good timing.

But we should not handle this work as a dogmatic basis.  Then your resulting process 
language might become too complex.  As some of the patterns (depending on the 
interpretation) might create unnecessary complexity.

regards, tom.




Heiko Braun wrote:
> 
> guys, that's quiet contradictory to what say on the forums.
> the page states "jBpm is an open-source workflow initiative that
> acknowledges the work on patterns.", but whenever that discussion
> regarding patterns has been put on the plate most of you tried to
> explain me why we don't need patterns and that "real" users never "asked
> for that".
> 
> What's up?
> 
> /Heiko
> 
> On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 08:22 +0200, Bernd Rücker wrote:
>> Huhu :-))
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: jbpm-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org
>> [mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces at lists.jboss.org] Im Auftrag von Ronald van Kuijk
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Oktober 2008 02:30
>> An: jbpm-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> Betreff: [jbpm-dev] BPMcenter interesting links
>>
>> I could not resist:
>>
>> http://is.tm.tue.nl/staff/wvdaalst/BPMcenter/links.htm
>>
>> Anyone seeing something familiar there ;-)
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev

-- 
regards, tom.