Huh? I'm confused on exactly what 4.2 is. Mark told me that it should
basically be in maintenance mode and only one person was going to be
maintaining it while the rest of the team focused on 5.0.
Better integration, not a single repository.
Burr Sutter wrote:
What is your timeframe for this concept?
I don't believe there are enough bodies to throw at jBPM 3.3/3.4 and ESB
4.2 to get them both out the door by June 2007 to bring those different
worlds closely in-line. Are you proposing a single repository/single
codebase or simply looking for better integration?
Burr
Bill Burke wrote:
>
>
> Bill Burke wrote:
>>
>>
>> Burr Sutter wrote:
>>> The "cons" for jBPM-based orchestration:
>>> - Does require learning of jPDL and jBPM actions. This is not a
>>> trivial undertaking.
>>
>> This is a relevant issue, but I think we can refactor base jbpm to
>> handle the simple usecases.
>>
>>
>>> - It requires lots of setup & configuration for jBPM such as getting
>>> the database configured correctly and Hibernate mapped correctly.
>>> This is not well documented and involves some heavy lifting on the
>>> part of the user. It is improving but does have a real learning curve.
>>>
>>
>> I think this is an irrelevant issue. This can be fixed. ESB 4.0
>> release had the same problems.
>>
>
> Let me expand on this. Burr, we have to stop thinking of other JEMS
> projects like black boxes.
>
> a) Its all open source
> b) We all work for the same company
> c) jBPM team is under Mark anyways
>
> We need to foster cross-contributors.
>
> Bill
>
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat Inc.