April 2007 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: swimlaneInstance overwritten when creating startTaskInst

by yoyoyoyo

same problem exists also in TaskInstance: | public void assign(ExecutionContext executionContext) { | ... | if (isStartTaskInstance()) { | // initialize the swimlane | swimlaneInstance = new SwimlaneInstance(swimlane); | taskMgmtInstance.addSwimlaneInstance(swimlaneInstance); | // with the current authenticated actor | swimlaneInstance.setActorId(SecurityHelper.getAuthenticatedActorId()); | | } else { | ... | | what is the connection between the Authentication and a startTask? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039295#4039295 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039295

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - swimlaneInstance overwritten when creating startTaskInstance

by yoyoyoyo

confused in TaskMgmtInstance createStartTaskInstance: | public TaskInstance createStartTaskInstance() { | ... | taskInstance.setActorId(SecurityHelper.getAuthenticatedActorId()); | return taskInstance; | } | this will overwrite any (if there is any) initialized swimlaneInstances related to this taskInstance because: | /** | * (re)assign this task to the given actor. If this task is related | * to a swimlane instance, that swimlane instance will be updated as well. | */ | public void setActorId(String actorId) { | setActorId(actorId, true); | } | | /** | * (re)assign this task to the given actor. | * @param actorId is reference to the person that is assigned to this task. | * @param overwriteSwimlane specifies if the related swimlane | * should be overwritten with the given swimlaneActorId. | */ | public void setActorId(String actorId, boolean overwriteSwimlane){ | ... | } | in our application we have to initialize all swimlaneInstances at processInstance creation time, in order to do reassignment dynamically before the start of a process. So would it be better if the code looks like this: | public TaskInstance createStartTaskInstance() { | ... | taskInstance.setActorId(SecurityHelper.getAuthenticatedActorId(), false); | return taskInstance; | } | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039288#4039288 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039288

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jbpm as enterprise application

by ricardomarques

Well on the next days I will be studing the avaiable information and source code, in the meantime if you find out where that info is, it probably would be a great help. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039264#4039264 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039264

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: anonymous beans

by adrian＠jboss.org

"bill.burke(a)jboss.com" wrote : don't see the reason for the extra complication Read the other threads! Why do we need to repeat everything already discussed every time you post? e.g. One advantage is being able to summarize duplicate names of beans in different deployments in the IncompleteDeploymentException. Currently you get an exception but it is not included in the summary because you can't install two beans with the same name. So all knowledge of the duplicate context is lost. Another is that is not more complicated, it is less. The MC deals with a single id (guaranteed unique) rather leaving it to the different contexts (and the user) to control. Finally, it is required for when we eventually get around to transactional deployment, where you don't do | uninstall bean1 | // Bean is unusable for a "long time" | install bean1 | you do | prepare to install GUID2 (name=Bean1) | prepare to uninstall GUID1 (name=Bean1) | vote | handoff state GUID1 -> GUID2 (e.g. socket/jndi front ends and other injections) | uninstall GUID1 | // Almost nothing since the handoff already changed which is the active one | install GUID2 | i..e. There are two beans being managed with the same name, but only one is the "active" one. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039253#4039253 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039253

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - 1.0 branch current using snapshot of common

by timfox

the 1_0_1_SP branch is currently depending on a snapshot version on jboss common: | <componentref name="jboss/common" version="snapshot"/> | Firstly, the branch doesn't currently compile since there is no jar in the repository at http://repository.jboss.com/jboss/common/snapshot/lib/. I'm assuming there is no jar there for a good reason - i.e. we shouldn't be using snapshots?? Is there any reason why 1_0_1_SP needs to depend on a snapshot? Seems a bit fishy to me. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039251#4039251 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039251

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: anonymous beans

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

don't see the reason for the extra complication View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039247#4039247 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039247

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jbpm as enterprise application

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

there is some explanations in the docs. don't know where i have put it. it's based on jeff delong's input. it might not contain all the details you're looking for, but it is already a very good overview. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039246#4039246 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039246

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: anonymous beans

by adrian＠jboss.org

"bill.burke(a)jboss.com" wrote : just tell me how to do it and i can do it. is my approach valid, etc. Repeating at least three other discussions... :-( The real solution is to always use an internal id (a GUID) then you don't need a name unless you are doing injections. The controller would use the GUID internally and map external calls name -> GUID and vice versa. For the Bean as a value | <bean > | <attribute name="blah><bean/></attribute> | </bean> | the GUID needs to be linked since this is really an injection. | <bean> | <attribute name="blah><inject bean="Anon#1"/></attribute> | <bean> | <bean name="Anon#1"/> | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039245#4039245 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039245

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Idiot's guide to setting up mc build in Eclipse?

by bill.burke＠jboss.com

sorry, no comprende eclispey View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039242#4039242 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039242

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Groovy Scripted Gateways... Useful for testing... and mo

by Kevin.Conner＠jboss.com

Tom checked the code in last night. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039241#4039241 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4039241

18 years, 11 months

1
0
0 / 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums April 2007