July 2009 - jboss-dev-forums - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: [BPMN2] Task-Outcome must be implemented differntly

by kukeltje

wow, we have a noob here in the forum... ;-) Yes, sounds logical. But this means that signalling via the api should set this variable? or can we have an additional solution that if there is a textual (non formal) condition that when signalling flow name/id is used. I can implement anything like this, but it has to be very specific. Including things like what if there is no flow that has a condition that evaluates to true. etc... View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246843#4246843 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246843

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: [BPMN2] How to implement uncontrolled sequence flow beha

by kukeltje

"camunda" wrote : P.S: I commit a failing test case with a uncontrolled sequence flow as Fork and two tasks, if somebody cannot stop himself from coding ;-) | If this test was the only thing failing ;-) - dueDate -> duedate, but named queries not updatred jbpm.execution.hbm.xml : Koen - AbstractTaskBinding in jbpm.bpmn.flownodes.xml which does not exist (yet?) : Bernd And the strange thing is, I do not see hudson failing yet...Or is there a delay? Oh... I take up the challenge... coding continues View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246827#4246827 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246827

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of POJO Server] - Re: Should Touching / changing timestamp of exploded folder

by rob.stryker＠jboss.com

added a jira link but not sure if it's filed in the right place. https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBMICROCONT-447 View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246818#4246818 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246818

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - Re: EJB 3.1 requirements for Web Beans

by wolfc

Except for the timeout method interceptors we got the annotated equivalents up and running. It should only be a matter of enabling the right deployers. The metadata for these functions should be coming up shortly. I'll put some focus on the timeout interceptors. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246817#4246817 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246817

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: SOAPProxy Enhancements

by dward

FYI: BASIC Auth and/or SSL are now supported by SOAPProxy, and is documented in the javadoc as well as in the Programmer's Guide: http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/labs/labs/jbossesb/trunk/product/docs/Prog... I also added a quickstart which demonstrates the functionality: "webservice_proxy_security". It features a simple JBossWS endpoint that is protected by both BASIC Auth + SSL, and a SOAPProxy which fronts it (which one would also consume via BASIC Auth + SSL): http://anonsvn.jboss.org/repos/labs/labs/jbossesb/trunk/product/samples/q... This was committed in svn revision 28581: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBESB-2759 View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246795#4246795 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246795

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss ESB] - Re: HTTP response (status) codes should be returned through

by dward

I didn't hear any feedback, so I went ahead and made this change. The default for SOAPClient, SOAPProducer, SOAPProxy and HttpRouter is now such that their response status will get returned by either the JBossRemotingGatewayListener and/or the HttpGatewayListener. If you want the legacy behavior, you can override this at an action level (META-INF/jboss-esb.xml): <action name="..." class="..."> | <property name="http.responseStatusEnabled" value="false"/> | </action> or at a global level (jbossesb-properties.xml): <esb> | <properties name="transports"> | <property name="org.jboss.soa.esb.http.responseStatusEnabled" value="false"/> | </properties> | </esb> Again, the default is now true. I still have to update the docs about this. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246794#4246794 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246794

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: [BPMN2] How to implement uncontrolled sequence flow beha

by kukeltje

Maybe it is a good idea for the time-being to just make it work and file a jira issue for a real solution. That way it can work for everybody by using the source, but the issue is not forgotten. And now we are into languages anyway: "als het niet kan zoals het moet, dan moet het maar zoals het kan" is what we say in Dutch. (finding a proper translation I came across: if it ain't dutch it ain't much. Something completely different, but just as true) 1 Heineken for each proper translation as google fails miserably View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246786#4246786 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246786

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: [BPMN2] use ids or names from bpmn 2 XML?

by kukeltje

Yes, I prefer Id's as wel, since they are checked against all refs when checking the xsd. sequenceflows that point to non-existent activities are automatically found. Including e.g. when you point the 'default' attribute in the exclusiveGateway to a non-existent sequenceflow. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246783#4246783 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246783

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of EJB 3.0] - EJB 3.1 requirements for Web Beans

by pete.muir＠jboss.org

Hi guys, Whilst eventually, we will need to test Web Beans against the whole of EJB 3.1, there are a number of specific pieces of functionality the spec makes assertions about. Therefore we cannot pass the CDI/JSR-299 TCK until these things are implemented. It boils down to: * No-interface local views * Singletons * timeout method interceptors Hopefully this is useful for your planning purposes :-) I added this comment http://www.jboss.org/community/wiki/EJB3Q32009#comment-1724. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246768#4246768 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246768

14 years, 9 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: [BPMN2] Task-Outcome must be implemented differntly

by camunda

Sorry, default mistake ;-) | <userTask id="x" /> | <flow name="ok" sourceRef="x" targetRef="y"> | <conditionExpression>#{outcome == "ok"}</conditionExpression> | </flow> | <flow name="cancel" sourceRef="x" targetRef="y"> | <conditionExpression>#{outcome == "cancel"}</conditionExpression> | </flow> | View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4246757#4246757 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4246757

14 years, 9 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 July 2009