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

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: design of identitymodule in tempranillo

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"kukeltje" wrote : The IdentityService is an interface as are Identity, User, Group and Membership. So I can easily implement my own LDAPIdentityService. Great... That is not the intention. And I believe it would be very hard to do. The main problems I see with a generic identity interface for DB & LDAP are : 1) For DB/hibernate you can use lazy loading and hibernate proxies. So you can easily navigate the plain object model. In LDAP, you typically have navigation methods as part of your session facade. 2) In situations as described in 1) and others, the session facade will be a compromise. Users have either a DB or an LDAP in their environment. So they don't want to take the compromise as for them, they want full access and power of either the DB or the LDAP solution. This discussion is interesting as inside of JBoss, there is an initiative to define exactly that identity interface with the DB and LDAP implementations. I will keep an eye on that to see what kind of compromise they will come up with. For the time being, we'll focus on a DB backed interface. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154933#4154933 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154933

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: ending a process from other token than root token

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"kukeltje" wrote : Shouldn't this behaviour be the default btw? that is a tricky one. for jPDL 4 we could review this choice. but i'm leaning towards keeping as is. if you show a diagram with a fork and an end-state in one of the branches, I would guess that a majority assumes the rest of the process will not be cancelled. introducing this was related to auto-completion. i believe that was triggered by vanderaalst patterns. a process should finish when there is nothing left to do. there is some logic that each time a token ends, it checks if there is some parent token still active. if not, the process instance is ended. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154930#4154930 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154930

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: org.jbpm.JbpmException: couldn't deserialize object

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

still hibernate will not know of the class. so i agree with bernd and ronald. we should document it as a known limitation. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154928#4154928 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154928

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: bug triage...

by alex.guizar＠jboss.com

Quite an effort, Ronald! Once jPDL 3.2.3 is out I'll go through the triage list as well. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154923#4154923 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154923

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: org.jbpm.JbpmException: couldn't deserialize object

by alex.guizar＠jboss.com

I think it is worth fixing. It is completely at odds with common sense that you can put action handler classes in your process archive, but not variable value classes. It does however imply a change in the Converter class, or an inelegant (but working) fix as shown in JBPM-1024. I'd propose to keep the fix on jBPM 3.2.x and change the Converter.revert() method on jBPM 3.3. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154920#4154920 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154920

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - design of identitymodule in tempranillo

by kukeltje

Currently the identitymodule in tempranillo realy seams service based... however... The IdentityService is an interface as are Identity, User, Group and Membership. So I can easily implement my own LDAPIdentityService. Great... What I do not get is why the IdentityServiceImpl uses Commands which are DB specific. I'd imagined the commands would be generic (using interfaces) and use the configured IdentityService to do the real work. Or do I miss something (It's late) Further I'd suggest changing getDbid() in the Identity interface to something less implementation specific like getTechId() (casing!!). In LDAP the 'technical' id is called a DN, so DbId is rather strange. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154913#4154913 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154913

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Alternative vfs jar implementation

by mstruk

I fixed the 'Scan failed' issue from my previous post. It was a VFS's problem - in a way that existing tests couldn't detect it. I added a test for it. 'jar-alter-work' branch is now merged in the trunk - did it in one commit :) Give it a try, and if something isn't working, tell me about it. - marko View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154901#4154901 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154901

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - ending a process from other token than root token

by kukeltje

We thought that it was not possible to end a process from one of the legs of a fork open tasks. By default the process, keeps running, only the specific token is ended. Now I know fork/joins may not contain functionality that go's around/outside the fork/join pair. But shouldn't ending a process not be an exception to this? while debugging to see if I could develop a workaround, I learned something.... changing <end-state name="e2" /> to <end-state name="e2" end-complete-process='true' /> in the end-state 'inside' the fork works as expected.... at least for my simple unit test. I'll make some more extended test and file a jira issue for documenting this... Shouldn't this behaviour be the default btw? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154899#4154899 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154899

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Build distro target

by timfox

I've sorted this now View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154891#4154891 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154891

17 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of Messaging on JBoss (Messaging/JBoss)] - Re: Build distro target

by timfox

Thanks Andy. One other small thing - I couldn't see a run.bat in the distro bin directory for our windows users, only a run.sh View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154890#4154890 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4154890

17 years, 10 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 June 2008