BTW, did you know jBPM has its own microcontainer ;-)?
Mark.
On 26 Mar 2007, at 13:31, Bill Burke wrote:
Burr Sutter wrote:
> My point is we have plenty of time to worry about this issue
> considering the jBPM team has a really long term set plan (a
> rewrite to be multi-process language focused) plus the fact that
> it has a human-centric workflow concern that is less directly
> related to the needs of the ESB.
> Now, we can certainly discuss how much more important are the
> needs of the ESB vs things like multi-language and human task
> management.
> Please sell me on the idea of lifecycle as it relates to jBPM.
> The instantiation and manipulation of a jBPM process is primarily
> a series of database transactions.
Um, jBPM doesn't have to be a series of database transactions.
That's the user's decision.
As far as lifecycle goes, right now jbpm works the same way as ESB
4.0 worked. Actions are created per invocation on the action. We
need actions that are created when the process definition starts so
that they can hold state and shared between process instances. ESB
would also need pluggable transition implementations so that per
transition, the developer can decide how the transition happens
(over JMS for instance).
Bill
--
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat Inc.
_______________________________________________
esb-dev mailing list
esb-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/esb-dev