[jbpm-dev] jBPM5 Request for Comments - feedback

[Sebastian Schneider]

Hello Mauricio,

Am 17.04.2010 15:40, schrieb Mauricio Salatino:
> All the authorization part in my opinion should be left outside of the
> framework scope. Because it always depends on business needs.
> The way that it's handled in Drools Flow and in jBPM 3.2.x it's a good
> approach.

I fully agree. It's done this way in jBPM 4.x, too.

> About BPMN2, if the PVM supports different languages, JPDL can be
> supported as well, but for interoperability reasons would be nice to
> have BPMN2 as priority. jBPM 4.x also has that approach right? it was
> trying to support BPMN2 as far as I know.

You're right. Development was focusing on this and it is already 
possible to execute BPMN-2.0 processes. So they weren't trying but they 
already showed that it worked. The most important elements like 
exclusive gateways, forks etc. are already supported but there is still 
a lot of fine tuning necessary.

To clarify: If the concept talks about the PVM it talks about the PVM of 
jBPM 4.x?

-- 
Sebastian Schneider
e-mail: Sebastian.Schneider at alumni.fh-aachen.de