i replied on the mailing list instead of the forum: anonymous wrote : The scope of jBPM 3 work is already way beyond the resources we have for it. We should focus on the necessary work to put jBPM 3 in maintenance rather then introducing a new API on it. | | We said in the meeting in the context of the migration debate that no API will be introduced in jBPM 3. A new API will be introduced in jBPM 4. | Apart from that, using the term process to indicate a process instance would be highly confusing. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4190173#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...