[jbpm-dev] new blog post about processes and rules integration
Maciej Swiderski
mswiders at redhat.com
Sat Aug 4 07:55:32 EDT 2012
As soon as I will finish initial version of simulation I will start
working on archetypes so help is on its way :) In the mean time we could
start gathering requirements on that - new thread on dev list?
Maciej
On 04.08.2012 13:44, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
> Totally agree with having downloadable projects..
> We need a quick way to transform a test into a fully distributable
> project, any Ideas? Archetypes is the way to go in my opinion, but if
> I start doing that It will slow my blog posting productivity :) I need
> some help please!
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Maciej Swiderski <mswiders at redhat.com
> <mailto:mswiders at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Comments in line.
>
> Maciej
>
>
> On 04.08.2012 13:09, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>> Hi Maciej,
>> Thank you very much for your feedback!
>> I will check your notes to see if I made some mistakes.
>> All the examples that you see in the posts has their own test
>> that you can run, if you want to have a project per example we
>> will end up with 10 different projects which will contain just
>> one single test.
>>
>> We should find a way to add this content to the docs. I mention
>> to marco, that as soon as the book is published I will be focused
>> in my blog and in the docs, so we can start adding this kind of
>> things.
> Alright, I think soon we all will spend some time on documentation :)
>
>>
>> More comments inline :)
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Maciej Swiderski
>> <mswiders at redhat.com <mailto:mswiders at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Mauricio, these posts are really good. I like that they are
>> kind of series that provides more and more details and
>> advanced usage scenarios and what's in my opinion most
>> important real life examples. Great work!
>>
>> Any idea on how many posts you are going to provide? Was
>> wondering that it looks like nice content to be introduced
>> into documentation as well. Maybe not whole posts but sort of
>> essence of it, as users especially new comers will look into
>> documentation first and could not be aware of our blogs, wdyt?
>>
>> I have two more scheduled about processes and rules before
>> jumping to Fusion
> Fusion, me like, Do you already have some examples/references
> about event aggregation, I am looking into it for simulation so
> would appreciate some help here as that is new thing to me - so I
> am looking forward to the posts about it :)
>
>>
>> So far you have not introduced the main (in my opinion)
>> integration between process and rule - business rule task,
>> but that is probably scheduled for next posts... However
>> introduction of using work item handlers here is more than
>> needed. That gives opportunity to users to get a chance to
>> get familiar with work item handlers concept.
>>
>> I kinda understand your point, but the Business Rule Task from
>> the BPMN2 specification perspective is more related to the
>> Stateless interaction mentioned in my posts. Talking with one of
>> the BPMN2 spec members they only think about that kind of
>> interaction. I think that at some point Tiho was working in
>> something to be able to link a business rule task to a special
>> work item like that one that I was trying to show in my examples.
>> If that work is already done, I will update my posts to show that
>> integration. I think that most of the true advantages of having
>> the Rule Engine are Stateful scenarios where almost everything is
>> handled as Facts (which is the topic of the next posts).
> Ok, I see and that is kind of what you described in your post,
> that it is traditional approach to the integration between process
> and rule worlds but it is not the case of jBPM5 and drools
> (fortunately) and since we already utilize it it's good to mention
> about it with comment that it shares session (rule uses same
> session as process instance).
>
>>
>> In the third one - great stuff is about reactive modes - both
>> based on fireUntilHalt and event listeners and some pros and
>> cons of each solution. Have not tried the examples myself but
>> what could really rock is an runnable example for each post
>> to conclude it.
>>
>>
>> Do you have a better idea about how we can distribute the
>> examples? I mean, all the examples are in my github repo. It
>> will really rock if we standardize this kind of things. The
>> archetypes that you mention some time ago will probably help a lot :)
> I was thinking to provide to each post an archive with maven
> project that can be quickly downloaded and run. Of course github
> is good way for those that are already using git, but I believe
> that there are still quite some people not using git out there
> (it's crazy I know ;)). Wdyt?
>
>>
>> P.S.
>> While reading I spotted few minor things:
>> - on first post last two process diagrams (illustrations)
>> shows inclusive gateway but both text and annotations on its
>> sequence flows refer to/suggest exclusive gateway
>>
>> I need to check this.. but I probably made a mistake there
>>
>> - on third post I think you meant beforeProcessStarted method
>> of process event listener instead of afterProcessStarted as
>> when this method is called process is already finished or
>> reached first state node which could be after some rules
>> evaluation nodes, isn't it?
>>
>> I need to check this specific example, but if I've used
>> afterProcessStarted probably was because of the reason that you
>> mention. I want to execute some rules after the process reaches
>> the first wait state.
> Ah ok, I thought more about inserting process instance into
> session so I added this comment but I got your point here and
> that's completely fine.
>
>>
>> Maciej
>>
>>
>> On 29.07.2012 14:14, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>> I've post a new article about the process and rules
>>> integrations.
>>> I'm extremely open to discuss if this is the right way of
>>> exposing this topics. I've found that when people doesn't
>>> understand this topics they end up with very complicated
>>> architectural problems.
>>> The main idea behind these posts is to clarify from the
>>> functional behavior what kind of things can be done, in
>>> order to:
>>> 1) Gather feedback about new features that can be introduced
>>> to facilitate the adoption of certain patterns
>>> 2) Classify in different patterns the functional
>>> requirements to then explain which architecture fits better,
>>> or what kind of things the users needs to be have in mind to
>>> define their own architecture.
>>>
>>> http://blog.athico.com/2012/07/processes-rules-or-rules-processes-3x.html
>>>
>>> After this post a set of patterns will be described and then
>>> a set of architectural posts will go out. At this point
>>> feedback from the other developers is crucial :)
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> --
>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>
>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>> jbpm-dev at lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev at lists.jboss.org>
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbpm-dev/attachments/20120804/9c54431e/attachment-0001.html
More information about the jbpm-dev
mailing list