jBPM 4.0 isn't due until late Q1/early Q2 2008. If we had specific
requirements we might be able to get the jBPM team focused on a
deliverable between now and and then but the challenge for jBPM is
focus: human-centric BPM/workflow or service-centric orchestration.
Bill Burke wrote:
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
>>
>