September 2008 - jboss-dev-forums

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Fixing classloading issues in jBPM with CL-Registry?

by Kevin.Conner＠jboss.com

The current jBPM issues are related but it is just part of a bigger issue with jBPM. The current codebase appears to be based on the premise that each jBPM instance is standalone and co-located with the code running within the system but this is not valid in an environment like the AS which can rely on a shared codebase. The notion of a jBPM deployer is an interesting one and is something that I have mentioned in the past. It is likely to be the keystone in any real solution to these issues. What is really missing is for jBPM to define a proper lifecycle for the processes in a shared environment, including support for artifacts which can be undeployed/redeployed. This will necessitate proper support for classloader hierarchies, scoped deployments etc. I should also add that I do not think that ESB is the correct location for this work, although we would have to modify some code to fit in with whatever is decided. Kev View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179330#4179330 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179330

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Fixing classloading issues in jBPM with CL-Registry?

by mark.little＠jboss.com

Hi Bernd. Have you looked at the classloader issue(s) in ESB/SOA-P that relate to jBPM? They may be relevant. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179327#4179327 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179327

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: RequestResponse MEP and JMSReplyTo

by mark.little＠jboss.com

This is a user question and not a design question. I'll move it to the right forum this time. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179326#4179326 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179326

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: Review of fix for JBWS-2304

by richard.opalka＠jboss.com

"darran.lofthouse(a)jboss.com" wrote : | Would it be Ok to go ahead with my initial fix to begin with and then I will work on the a complete solution including refactoring next | Yes, no problem. "darran.lofthouse(a)jboss.com" wrote : - one issue that will need to resolved is that because DOMUtils is in common it does have some use with the other three stacks. AFAICS DOMUtils ThreadLocal capability is used in native stack only ;) View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179307#4179307 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179307

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Initialise thread context classloader

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

Bernd, your proposal to set the context classloader around all the user code places is ok. it would be great if you could do that. i'll review and back you up in case that turns out to be necessary. but the only part i didn't get yet was the loading classes from the dedicated ear files. if i understand correct, it is an optional addition to this context classloader fix. let's discuss that separately. in the meantime, you can go ahead and contribute this functionality of setting the context classloader. what kind of tests for this did you have in mind ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179306#4179306 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179306

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss Web Services] - Re: Review of fix for JBWS-2304

by darran.lofthouse＠jboss.com

Thanks Richard, Would it be Ok to go ahead with my initial fix to begin with and then I will work on the a complete solution including refactoring next - one issue that will need to resolved is that because DOMUtils is in common it does have some use with the other three stacks. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179305#4179305 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179305

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Bug in action processing time

by Kevin.Conner＠jboss.com

I have fixed this in our CP branch, which will be in the upcoming platform release. The issue is https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBESB-2078. I will get it moved across to trunk with the rest of the CP updates. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179303#4179303 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179303

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Bug in action processing time

by kadlecp

That's ok. Monitoring tool helped me a lot when creating stats of my business process. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179300#4179300 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179300

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: Bug in action processing time

by Kevin.Conner＠jboss.com

You are correct, that should not be based off the start time of the pipeline. I'll create a JIRA and have it addressed, apologies for this. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179297#4179297 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179297

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: community branch

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"kukeltje" wrote : sure, but who is going to monitor that? Merge it? Even after 4.0. People can add functionality without adding testcases, docs or whatever, like Tom mentiones. Is e.g. test coverage going to be part of releases as well. Do these people also need to sign the contributor assignment ? If not, JBoss might get in trouble with copyright infringements. all the requirements will be just as they are now. in fact, we'll make the requirements much more clear to contributors. we should document clearly what we expect : * link to jira issue * code updates * test coverage * docs updates * xsd schema updates * and so on the more complete work a contributor delivers, the easier it is for us to merge the change into the project trunk branch. if people do not submit complete work (which they can) then it depends on whether someone else takes their work and finishes it. that could be other people from the community or people from the jbpm team itself. this would allow us to give svn access very easily so that people can just give it a go. and on the other hand, it allows us to adopt only the contributions which we think are mature enough to enter the project/product. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4179292#4179292 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4179292

16 years, 2 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums September 2008