[jbpm-dev] new blog post about processes and rules integration

Sat Aug 4 07:57:17 EDT 2012

Let's create a new thread!

On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Maciej Swiderski <mswiders at redhat.com>wrote:

>  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>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>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 listjbpm-dev at lists.jboss.orghttps://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 -
>
>
>

-- 
 - 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/20120804/77bdd8fb/attachment.html 