Sebastian Schneider [
http://community.jboss.org/people/sebastian.s] replied to the
discussion
"jBPM 4 is dead?"
To view the discussion, visit:
http://community.jboss.org/message/538577#538577
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Mark!
I can understand how you feel about this. The really long missing statements from Red Hat
/ JBoss really left the community with doubt and insecurity.
From what I can say: discussion on the future of jBPM just started on
the mailing list. I am getting the idea that Drools and jBPM should be joined in one
project to offer a more complete solution - but how this is going has not been decided
yet. Sometimes I am getting the impression it has been - in this case the discussion on
the developer's mailing list would be useless. For me there is still the chance that
jBPM 5 will be based-up on parts of jBPM 4. It offers the PVM to also support Drools Flow
and after all Drools in first place is still a java rule engine based up-on the rete
algorithm IMHO. jBPM 4 is not bad - not just yet finished. I think there is already a kind
of consensus that users should be enabled to just use the rules engine and the process
engine of jBPM 5 without having to deal with both of them.
For my part I hope that the discussion taking place on the developers' mailing list is
one with an outcome which has not been decided. I would like to invite you to join the
discussion on the mailing list, Mark. I would especially be interested in your current use
case.
Cheers!
Sebastian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Reply to this message by going to Community
[
http://community.jboss.org/message/538577#538577]
Start a new discussion in jBPM at Community
[
http://community.jboss.org/choose-container!input.jspa?contentType=1&...]