Hi Bill, In a nutshell, we are moving away from the J2EE (JEE) stack - but staying Java. I think that TerraCotta has it "right on the money" when it comes to how you should be developing your applications from an enterprise perspective. So having to carry around a big application server and manage it is bit 'old school'. The current jBPM is a beast. Even when we had it working in starter kit mode, when something went wrong the "black box" was just too black. We were not sure if it was jBPM, JBoss or something else. Would we care if jBPM required a specific directory structure to run? I think JBoss should always ask itself whether a constraint that they are imposing is something that a competing open source project can overcome. If you see other workflow engines requiring it, then ok... but I don't think they do. We want to run a workflow engine wherever we want. We may have one instance running in Tomcat to handle presentation related workflows that would be "lighter" allowing Tomcat to do what it does best - serve up JSPs. And we may want to run a heavier weight workflow in some standalone process on some server and expose it via a web service or even (gulp) an RMI call. We do NOT want it to require JMS as JMS in JBoss has proved to be a royal pain in the butt. And, it would be cool if the two workflow engines could work together seamlessly. Your embedded JBoss info sounds interesting. I think you have my email so send me the info. I think you know I am a big fan of JBoss. I've been around since version 2. But times are a' changin' and you guys gotta keep it easy, slick and modular. Hope this helps, Mark View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4029171#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...