[rules-users] BPMN 2.0 versioning

[Cedric Hurst]

I'm not sure if this answers your question but JBPM 5.x does offer process mapping: 

http://docs.jboss.org/jbpm/v5.0/userguide/ch03.html#d0e1280 

--
Build Smarter Software.

Spantree Technology Group, LLC
813 W Randolph St, Suite 301, Chicago, IL
email: cedric at spantree.net (mailto:cedric at spantree.net) | phone: 773.359.3865 (tel:773.359.3865)


On Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 3:18 AM, Alberto R. Galdo wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>    As you may know, previous releases of JBPM had support for jPDL processes versioning. 
> 
>    As per the deployment process, the process was serialized as Java objects into the database as blobs once it was converted as such at deployment time. 
> 
>    From that time on, every process in execution was linked to it's process serialization ( the version that was active at that moment ) and subsequent serializations of newer versions of the same process where versioned and the new process instances keep track of what version of the process definition they were linked to. That made very easy the task of updating process definitions in an application just keeping in mind that previous process instances will execute by the previous process definition and newer process instances will follow the latest process definition version. 
> 
>    Now, in JBPM 5.x things don't seem to work that way anymore. Processes are defined using BPMN 2.0, live in a Drools KnowledgeSession, and seems there's no support for process definition versioning.  
> 
>    So, how would you solve the problem of having in the same KnowledgeSession different versions of the same process ( each having it's bag of process instances attached ) in JBPM 5.x ? Is it that even possible?. We have a long time running application that has up to 7 different versions of a process and this really is a feature we need. 
> 
>    Seems that one solution would be to have different versions of the process definition live in the knowledge session bound to different process names and make your application aware of that when launching new instances ... but that seems more of a workaround ... Is this really the unique solution for this? 
> 
> Greets,
> 
> 
> Alberto R. Galdo
> argaldo at gmail.com (mailto:argaldo at gmail.com)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org (mailto:rules-users at lists.jboss.org)
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
> 
> 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20121018/ca643911/attachment-0001.html