Re: action framework was Re: [esb-dev] divide and conquer samples?
Kurt T Stam wrote:
Here are some more things to consider:
1. jPDL is Process Description Language. Now in my eyes the node is
pretty much a ESB service and I think that all fits pretty well. But the
thing that is missing is the description of the connection between
processes, the bus in ESB terms. So I think we'd need to extend jPDL
here, to be able to describe that 'bus connection'.
This is what I meant by jBPM transition pluggins. You'll want jBPM to
have pluggable transition implementations.
2. As soon as we accept buses between nodes then we may break out
into
different JVMs, each having their own configuration file. I think this
is something that is missing right now too. We'd need some kind of
demarcation.
This is where I think it can get really interesting. The Process
Definition could travel with the message. So, if you are transitioning
to another JVM, that JVM doesn't have to have the same process
definition deployed.
But, jBPM process definitions also can be stored in a database
(repository). So, if a given JVM doesn't have the process definition
deployed, it can just load it.
3. Can this foundation be extended to support managing/monitoring
messages and errors in the ESB nerwork? I think jBPM wants this too BTW.
Seems like there is overlap there too?
Bill
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat Inc.