June 2008 - jbpm-dev - Jboss List Archives

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jPDL 4 early feedback

by kukeltje

anonymous wrote : so when users want to add a new node type, i don't want them to be forced to write an xsd and configure the namespace in the process. I do not realy see a problem with this. If they can create their own node types I bet they fairly easy make their own xsd, certainly if we provide an example View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159679#4159679 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159679

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jbpm-api first draft

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

i would like to see how in this proposal we're going to implement cross cutting concerns like authorization, transactions, retry upon optimistic locking failure and make it configurable for different environments like plain java, servlet, ee, seam, spring,... not all the details are necessary, just the interception points. as far as i got it, your proposal seems to reflect the pattern of a statefull session bean, while i can only see it work with a stateless session bean approach. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159529#4159529 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159529

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jbpm-api first draft

by thomas.diesler＠jboss.com

This is now in place | // Create a ProcessDefinition through the ProcessDefinitionManager | ProcessDefinitionManager pdm = ProcessDefinitionManager.locateProcessDefinitionManager(); | ProcessDefinition pd = pdm.createProcessDefinition(jpdl); | | // Create an Execution through the ProcessDefinition | Execution ex = pd.createExecution(); | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159518#4159518 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159518

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - jBPM3 API now based on microcontainer

by thomas.diesler＠jboss.com

Folks, the API now gets its artifacts configured through the MC | <deployment xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="urn:jboss:bean-deployer:2.0 bean-deployer_2_0.xsd" | xmlns="urn:jboss:bean-deployer:2.0"> | |  | <bean name="jBPMProcessEngine" class="org.jbpm.integration.client.ProcessEngineImpl"> | <property name="processDefinitionManager"><inject bean="jBPMProcessDefinitionManager"/></property> | <property name="processInstanceManager"><inject bean="jBPMProcessInstanceManager"/></property> | <property name="executionManager"><inject bean="jBPMExecutionManager"/></property> | </bean> | |  | <bean name="jBPMProcessDefinitionManager" class="org.jbpm.integration.client.ProcessDefinitionManagerImpl"> |  | </bean> | |  | <bean name="jBPMProcessInstanceManager" class="org.jbpm.integration.client.ProcessInstanceManagerImpl"> |  | </bean> | |  | <bean name="jBPMExecutionManager" class="org.jbpm.integration.client.ExecutionManagerImpl"> |  | </bean> | | </deployment> | With this abstraction in place it should be possible to implement the mapping for the JBPM4 code base You can consume the API and the related tests from cheers http://snapshots.jboss.org/maven2/org/jboss/jbpm/ View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159503#4159503 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159503

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jPDL 4 early feedback

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"heiko.braun(a)jboss.com" wrote : From the schema doc is kind of hard see the big picture. Can we come up with some example xml files? To see how concrete process definitions look like? yes. i thought of building out examples as i implemented the nodes. but it's probably wise to provide a few example jpdl files up front. a set of wiki pages ? do i just put them in the old wiki, or is it more convenient if i start building those pages in the new wiki directly ? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159468#4159468 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159468

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jPDL 4 early feedback

by tom.baeyens＠jboss.com

"heiko.braun(a)jboss.com" wrote : I am wondering why the schema contains element declarations for concrete activities like 'email'. IMO we shouldn't treat the stock activities anyhow different as the ones user supply. That means they wouldn't be represented by an element name on it's own. jPDL is an executable process language. Each node is of a certain type. One node type will delegate to an activity implementation (== direct mapping to the PVM construct). Another node type will call a java method through running a script or evaluating an expression. Other node types do more functional behaviour like email. Separating the structure from the activity behaviour would make the XML a lot more verbose and hence less readable. "heiko.braun(a)jboss.com" wrote : On the other hand, if we move stock activities to a custom namespace, then they are separated from the core xsd constructs. using separate namespaces for user defined node types is certainly something that i think should be possible. but a whole process should be usable without namespaces as well, i think. just referencing the core jpdl xsd in the default namespace is simple. so that should never be a problem. but combining namespaces is what always should be optional. meaning. the functionality should always be available with or without setting up the namespaces properly. so when users want to add a new node type, i don't want them to be forced to write an xsd and configure the namespace in the process. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159466#4159466 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159466

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jPDL 4 early feedback

by heiko.braun＠jboss.com

>From the schema doc is kind of hard see the big picture. Can we come up with some example xml files? To see how concrete process definitions look like? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159455#4159455 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159455

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Please subscribe to jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org

by jbarrez

Done View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159454#4159454 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159454

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jPDL 4 early feedback

by heiko.braun＠jboss.com

On the other hand, if we move stock activities to a custom namespace, then they are separated from the core xsd constructs. Maybe we should allow user to introduce the0ir own namespaces? Let say you provide an XSD with custom activities for inclusion and your activities derive from a base type, then people could do do something like: | <process-definition> | <xmlns="http://foo.bar.com/order/v1" creditcardVerification/> | </process-definition> | Whereas creditcardVerfification derives from http://jbpm.org/jpdl-4:activity. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159453#4159453 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159453

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: jPDL 4 early feedback

by heiko.braun＠jboss.com

I am wondering why the schema contains element declarations for concrete activities like 'email'. IMO we shouldn't treat the stock activities anyhow different as the ones user supply. That means they wouldn't be represented by an element name on it's own. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4159450#4159450 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4159450

15 years, 10 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

jbpm-dev June 2008