[jbpm-dev] [Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Future of jBPM???
KrisVerlaenen
do-not-reply at jboss.com
Thu Oct 23 12:59:03 EDT 2008
anonymous wrote : I regret that the drools guys put so much effort in duplication. We have had a couple of meetings on this topic. But we couldn't come to a joint PVM strategy yet. Hopefully that will still happen.
The Drools team has always been asking for collaboration with the jBPM team from the start. We presented specific recommendations on how to improve the design of a the current jBPM PVM model in several areas, more than a year ago. We also suggested broadening the scope to make it not process-centric but knowledge-centric, allowing unification and a tight integration (and still loosely-coupled as well of course) between rules and processes.
What you call duplication (and we consider improvement !) was the only option to move forward at that point. The Drools team will continue to actively add new exciting features to the Drools Flow engine. We believe that at this point we already offer most of the features supported by the jBPM engine (and much more), using a superior design.
But we hope the jBPM team would reconsider collaborating with us and we are still open for any type of discussion and collaboration, as it'll allow us to combine our strengths and resources in the most efficient way ...
anonymous wrote : One of the main things I don't see [in Drools Flow] yet is the whole persistence and support of long running processes.
Drools Flow does offer persistence of your runtime process state, by providing JPA-based persistence of process instances, adding support for long-living processes as well.
Kris
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4184282#4184282
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4184282
More information about the jbpm-dev
mailing list