i think's unwise for jboss to invest in 2 engines and then select the best one in this particular case. exploring 2 technological strategies/solutions and see what works would be justifyable. but that is imo completely different from the situation we're discussing. in this case, there is no feature that they target that cannot be build on jbpm. from the beginning i have tried to collaborate by pointing out how all the features they requested could have been build on on jbpm. apart from taste, i have not been able to see a real reason why they had to do it different. in their logic, they think that they are doing things differently (mostly joint process/rule execution, and nicer integrated in drools codebase/api). and therefor must build their own version of the pvm. View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4239383#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...