[jbpm-dev] [Design of JBoss jBPM] - renaming signal to trigger ?

[tom.baeyens@jboss.com]

to prevent a nameclash between our state-machine inspired signal and the bpmn signal, we could consider renaming our pvm signal to trigger.

but this implies a lot of work (1/2 day for me)  and that's why i am in doubt.  i am convinced that trigger is better.    there is also the risk that it turns out to take longer then expected.

do you think this rename is crucial ?  

the only motivation is reduce the confusion when we build native bpmn 2.0 later on the pvm.  bpmn does not specify an api, so there is not real problem in terms of compatibility.

wdyt ?

View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4225927#4225927

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4225927