[jBPM Development] - Re: Some bugs and feature requests on jBPM 4.1
by camunda
Joram wrote :
| 2. Invalid types.xml doesn't result in a parsing error
|
| Indeed a 'nice to have' feature ... should be easy to catch and log.
|
No, I think logging is not appropriate. The XML is wrong, so it should throw an exception!
Joram wrote :
| 4. Should be possible to set Subprocess Key by expression
|
| I've heard this request from someone else too. Besides have an easier overview with multiple subprocesses, what other benefits do you see?
|
If you have to externally signal that sub process you have to search it by key (since searching by process variables is not yet possible and maybe ineffective). But therefor you need a possibility to specify the key on creation to use it later to query the right process instance.
Joram wrote :
| 7. Signavio
|
| I agree. I got the same feedback from a meeting with real-life users. Also, the other way around (from Eclipse -> Signavio) doesn't always work well regarding coordinates, it seems.
|
Yesterday I got a NPE when opening a process from Eclipse in Signavio (unfortantely in a live presentation ;-) Anyway, so for sure there is still some work to do in that area ;-)
anonymous wrote :
| 8. Support EJB3 Entities as process variables
|
Yes, Ronald is right. How to use SLSB as variable? ;-) The other feature is nice as well, but EJB3 Entities is more important for me at the moment. But since both makes sense, cool to hear there is some progress in that area.
You should be totally releaxed after your honemoon, eh?
Can you create the bugs as JIRA issues? That would be really cool, otherwise I will do it hopefully next week.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4261639#4261639
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4261639
14 years, 8 months
[jBPM Development] - Re: Some bugs and feature requests on jBPM 4.1
by jbarrez
"kukeltje" wrote : "jbarrez" wrote :
| | "camunda" wrote :
| | | 8. Support EJB3 Entities as process variables
| | | I think this is a pretty important feature, since a lot of projeects start with EJB3 today. Since Tom fixed a bug in the binding code, I think I can go ahead with that. Will post something as soon I had time to work on it again. If anybody else putting effort into this, please let me know!
| | |
| |
| | The idea is to have a native activity for EJB3 invocations. If im correct, it was scheduled for 4.3.
| |
|
| Isn't there a difference between EJB3 invocations (SFSB, SLSB) and Entity(beans)? Bernd talks about the latter, while you talk about the former.
|
| In combination with the former, integration with Seam (components) should also have a high priority. Personally I'd not have a separate EJB activity, but extend the java activity in such a way that (component)resolvers are used to find the SLSB/SFSB/Seam component/Springbean by name
Right ... in my head EJB3 = SF/SL session beans and JPA is something else ... probably has to do something with bad EJB2 entity memories. So sorry for not reading the remark correctly.
Anyway. Afaik, the current plan is to extends the java activity with EJB capabilities and not create a new activity type.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4261611#4261611
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4261611
14 years, 8 months
[jBPM Development] - Re: Some bugs and feature requests on jBPM 4.1
by kukeltje
"jbarrez" wrote :
| "camunda" wrote :
| | 8. Support EJB3 Entities as process variables
| | I think this is a pretty important feature, since a lot of projeects start with EJB3 today. Since Tom fixed a bug in the binding code, I think I can go ahead with that. Will post something as soon I had time to work on it again. If anybody else putting effort into this, please let me know!
| |
|
| The idea is to have a native activity for EJB3 invocations. If im correct, it was scheduled for 4.3.
|
Isn't there a difference between EJB3 invocations (SFSB, SLSB) and Entity(beans)? Bernd talks about the latter, while you talk about the former.
In combination with the former, integration with Seam (components) should also have a high priority. Personally I'd not have a separate EJB activity, but extend the java activity in such a way that (component)resolvers are used to find the SLSB/SFSB/Seam component/Springbean by name
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4261610#4261610
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4261610
14 years, 8 months