[jbpm-dev] [Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: introducing process instance ?

[jbarrez]

Tom,

I agree that it makes the executionService more user-friendly.
After all, when you signal an execution and he forks in 5 paths, the following 5 waitstates should be returned to make the code more easier to understand.

The only alternative for the ProcessInstance I'm seeing  is a Set/Map/... of curent wait states of the 'root execution'. (or return nothing and let the user make a query ... but then we're back at jbpm 3, which was flawed in that perspective)

But I don't agree that the ProcessInstance should be an interface.
Why not make it an extension of the ExecutionImpl? After all, the ProcessInstance is just another name of a very specific execution (ie the root execution). You could add some specifc stuff to the process instance (eg business key? as it was in jbpm3 or getAllWaitStates())



View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225824#4225824

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225824