[jBPM Users] - Re: Implementing Escalation in jBPM 4.1
by kukeltje
"The European guy" wrote : I managed to use a timer to make the engine take a timeout transition after some time. My question here: If you make the engine take the transition like this is the previous task completed? Or is this the wrong approach and I should just change the assignment of the task in jBPM?
In 3 it is ended (and configurable) in 4 it is not ended (not configurable) but there is a jira issue for this to make it compatible again. Reassignment is also an option, but that is not visible in the processdefinition then.
"The European guy" wrote : I am thinking about the first one because business people often model escalations like this: There is a transition to take when the task is completed or a different one is taken on a timer event leading to a task assigned to somebody else.
| Yes, me to, and this will be visualized also on the GPD once the timeout from BPMN comes into play
"The European guy" wrote : If the task was marked completed when the timeout transition was taken wouldn't this be a bit strange for reports on processes because actually the first person did not complete the task but it was marked as completed?
That is why the task lifecycle is so interesting since you can add an additional 'state' (not a node but the state of a task ;-))
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257065#4257065
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257065
16 years, 7 months
[jBPM Users] - Re: Implementing Escalation in jBPM 4.1
by sebastian.s
Thanks for this really long answer, Ronald. In my opinion you are right, escalation is a very complex thing and can mean a lot and I appreciate the flexibility of jBPM but maybe we should think of a basic thing to be included with the distro while replacing it with your own implementation is still possible. Enable simple escalations without the need of coding to give people a smooth start.
To me it is actually about a simple one right now. I would like to assign a task to somebody else or take a transition to a second task assigned to somebody else.
I managed to use a timer to make the engine take a timeout transition after some time. My question here: If you make the engine take the transition like this is the previous task completed? Or is this the wrong approach and I should just change the assignment of the task in jBPM?
I am thinking about the first one because business people often model escalations like this: There is a transition to take when the task is completed or a different one is taken on a timer event leading to a task assigned to somebody else.
If the task was marked completed when the timeout transition was taken wouldn't this be a bit strange for reports on processes because actually the first person did not complete the task but it was marked as completed?
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4257059#4257059
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4257059
16 years, 7 months
Delivery reports about your e-mail
by Returned mail
Your message was undeliverable due to the following reason:
Your message could not be delivered because the destination server was
not reachable within the allowed queue period. The amount of time
a message is queued before it is returned depends on local configura-
tion parameters.
Most likely there is a network problem that prevented delivery, but
it is also possible that the computer is turned off, or does not
have a mail system running right now.
Your message was not delivered within 7 days:
Host 193.27.245.7 is not responding.
The following recipients could not receive this message:
<jboss-user(a)lists.jboss.org>
Please reply to postmaster(a)lists.jboss.org
if you feel this message to be in error.
16 years, 7 months
