October 2008 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of POJO Server] - ProfileService and marshalling

by alesj

WRT: - http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=118658&postdays=... - http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=115231 Just came across useful in-house stuff: - http://dmlloyd.blogspot.com/2008/10/jboss-marshalling-framework-100beta1.... Perhaps we could use this to do fine-grained control over PS's server-client serialization? e.g. no need for sub-classes of ManagedProperty, instead use external/plugable mechanism to minimize client side view View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180760#4180760 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180760

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by heiko.braun＠jboss.com

Agree, it's API stuff. But I was referring to this anonymous wrote : | Questions were more about declaring vars, typing them, giving default values etc | My concern was more about granularity of the discussion. I.e. Thomas reply is more likely what I consider an appropriate level to have a discussion at the team meeting. Does that make sense? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180758#4180758 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180758

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by kukeltje

"thomas.diesler(a)jboss.com" wrote : Actually, cancelling needs to be addresses in a much broader and general sense. | Another threadjack??? hmmm...hahaha... but... good discussions upfront, so everybody can let it sink in and think about it "thomas.diesler(a)jboss.com" wrote : ...is merely a loose collection of related topics without the claim for completeness. The scope of cancel support can be defined for 1-Jan. However, please beware that there are much more basic and urgent topics to be covered. I agree but you'll see there is a closer relation between the items you mention and the api, the language etc... Focussing just on the basics can make (j)BPM look over simplified.. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180752#4180752 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180752

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"kukeltje" wrote : | Still.... I get the feeling that extending the 'task handling process' a little is not wrong, but making it really configurable is imo well.. not realy a waste of time, but certainly not high priority... what we have is not that wrong. Putting two eventhandlers on a definition is supported *now*, making it configurable takes a lot of time | bull needed task lifecycle pluggability and it was not that hard. if we want to go far in ease of use, then things could get more complicated. probably it will be easier to just add the pluggability and agree upon a default then agree whether a cancellation implies a task-end... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180748#4180748 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180748

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by kukeltje

"jbarrez" wrote : (Hijacking the thread again :p) | Accepted "jbarrez" wrote : | Ronald, is it possible to make a blog post about it or was it for a customer? I'm interested in seeing your approach ... perhaps we can exchange our ideas? | working on it, escalating tasks was part of it... not all will be in there since it would become to complex, but it is another nice example that you can do lots of things with jBPM with small amounts of additional code "jbarrez" wrote : | eg. we had to create a special actorId 'parser' by using a 'role:assigned_to' string: if the assigned_to it meant that no-one was working on it, else the task is visible to anyone of the role. Hmm.... we could just use pooled actors (which were group/role names). If you want to discuss this more easily, contact me on aol/msn/skype, is all in my profile View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180746#4180746 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180746

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by thomas.diesler＠jboss.com

Actually, cancelling needs to be addresses in a much broader and general sense. The loose term of cancel applies to many scenarios. From what I can see few of which are well defined * cancelling a process definition - cascading to process instance or not - allowing running instances to terminate gracefully or not * cancelling a process instance - implicit cancelling through RuntimeException - explicit cancelling through user exception - model defined error flow - model defined compensation flow * cancelling of single task instance - general support for multiple task instance Also, how does an error during signal and message processing affect the process instance i.e. should the process be cancelled or not. The above is merely a loose collection of related topics without the claim for completeness. The scope of cancel support can be defined for 1-Jan. However, please beware that there are much more basic and urgent topics to be covered. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180745#4180745 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180745

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by kukeltje

"jbarrez" wrote : | IMO is this API stuff. Human tasks are the most used concept of jBPM (in my experience). | Yep "jbarrez" wrote : | This needs be discussed properly before being implemented by a single person or you would get situations like this thread where someone needs a cancel-event and it does not exist altough conceptually there are some use cases. forget the first example though in my previous post... does not solve my own problem. since I do not need the cancel-event (I was put on the wrong foot by Jorams reply), but do not want an end-event on cancel... conceptually different and as Joram states correctly more then implementation. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180743#4180743 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180743

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by jbarrez

(Hijacking the thread again :p) anonymous wrote : Hmm... I did something similar once in a p.o.c. but did not use/need any variables. Maybe because we took another angle on it, but I could deduce all from the methods on the task. Otoh, we did not have to query for them, the number of tasks we that limited that we could use the default tasklist query and filter afterwards. Ronald, is it possible to make a blog post about it or was it for a customer? I'm interested in seeing your approach ... perhaps we can exchange our ideas? eg. we had to create a special actorId 'parser' by using a 'role:assigned_to' string: if the assigned_to it meant that no-one was working on it, else the task is visible to anyone of the role. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180740#4180740 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180740

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by kukeltje

anonymous wrote : Then you are missing the TASK_END event if the task is cancelled. People for who see 'finishing a task ' (ie. cancelling or completing) as the end of a task (which is conceptually also correct) and now simply use an event handler for the TASK_END event are obliged to use 2 event handlers now. | I know, but it should not limit us (and it should not be neccesarilly be in 3.3 (I created my own local patch), or we can even do something like | if (this.isCancelled { | task.fireEvent(Event.EVENTTYPE_TASK_CANCEL, executionContext); | task.fireEvent(Event.EVENTTYPE_TASK_END, executionContext); | } else { | task.fireEvent(Event.EVENTTYPE_TASK_END, executionContext); | } | or even | if (this.isCancelled && jbpm.properties.Task-cancel-event-backwards-compatibility != true) { | task.fireEvent(Event.EVENTTYPE_TASK_CANCEL, executionContext); | } else { | task.fireEvent(Event.EVENTTYPE_TASK_END, executionContext); | } | and make that property by default true.... but that is probably what Tom want's in the task specific config file... Still.... I get the feeling that extending the 'task handling process' a little is not wrong, but making it really configurable is imo well.. not realy a waste of time, but certainly not high priority... what we have is not that wrong. Putting two eventhandlers on a definition is supported *now*, making it configurable takes a lot of time anonymous wrote : but I did have a use case in which the states of a task were THE most import thing: cancelled, suspended, ended, assigned but not taken, working on it, etc. all those states were possible for a task. So you can imagine I would have been very happy at that moment if I had some more options ... we had to juggle a bit with task variables to get it all done. | Hmm... I did something similar once in a p.o.c. but did not use/need any variables. Maybe because we took another angle on it, but I could deduce all from the methods on the task. Otoh, we did not have to query for them, the number of tasks we that limited that we could use the default tasklist query and filter afterwards. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180739#4180739 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180739

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Cancelling a task fires task-end event

by jbarrez

(sorry to intervene too ;-) Heiko, IMO is this API stuff. Human tasks are the most used concept of jBPM (in my experience). This needs be discussed properly before being implemented by a single person or you would get situations like this thread where someone needs a cancel-event and it does not exist altough conceptually there are some use cases. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4180737#4180737 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4180737

16 years, 3 months

1
0
0 / 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums October 2008