2:33 p.m.
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>wrote:
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this
is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom has
this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state of
implementation
Regards,
Anurag
2:42 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to implement..
and probably you can model that with the complex converge gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>wrote:
> Hi Kris,
>
> How are you
>
> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this
> is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>
> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state
> of implementation
>
> Regards,
> Anurag
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
2:46 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
>
> Antoine
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi Kris,
>>
>> How are you
>>
>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this
>> is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>
>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
>> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state
>> of implementation
>>
>> Regards,
>> Anurag
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
2:48 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
> gateway.
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>
>> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
>>
>> Antoine
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Kris,
>>>
>>> How are you
>>>
>>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway,
>>> this is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
>>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>>
>>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
>>> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state
>>> of implementation
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Anurag
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
3:47 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi Mauricio,
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that all incoming have
been triggered and when it is so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
process can continue)
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
branch1
/ \
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
\ /
branch 3
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all branches that were
actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know which
branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just wait for all branches to be
triggered). here in case of OR - we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or
not
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the description it
looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to implement.. and
probably you can model that with the complex converge gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this is the gateway
which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and propagates token
when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom has this in
roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
Regards,
Anurag
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
7:21 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi Anurag,
Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want to
do now.
Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it was
in Drools Flow? Am I right?
You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
execution?
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that
all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
branch1
/ \
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
\ /
branch 3
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the
problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it was
easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
>> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
>> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
>> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
>> gateway.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
>>>
>>> Antoine
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Kris,
>>>>
>>>> How are you
>>>>
>>>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway,
>>>> this is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on
all
>>>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>>>
>>>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
>>>> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and
state
>>>> of implementation
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Anurag
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>
>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
10:53 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi there,
just some general remarks from my side:
the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from
trivial. See e.g. references below.
<http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B3F
852577DE003B5477/$File/rz3791.pdf>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B3F8
52577DE003B5477/$File/rz3791.pdf
<http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/>
http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
However, I'd be interested in the concrete business requirement you have for
modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large part of
regular requirements just using the "simple" gateways.
Best
Markus
From: jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
[mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On Behalf Of Mauricio Salatino
Sent: Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
To: Anurag Aggarwal
Cc: jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Subject: Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
Hi Anurag,
Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want to
do now.
Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it was
in Drools Flow? Am I right?
You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
execution?
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that all
incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls triggerCompleted
(so that the rest of the process can continue)
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
branch1
/ \
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
\ /
branch 3
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the
problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it was
easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to implement..
and probably you can model that with the complex converge gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
wrote:
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this is
the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all upstream
tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom has
this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state of
implementation
Regards,
Anurag
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
11 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times but
there are also some complex business use case that can complicate the
generic approaches.
Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you
want to achieve.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
Hi there,****
** **
just some general remarks from my side:****
** **
the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from
trivial. See e.g. references below.****
** **
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
****
http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/****
** **
However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you have
for modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large part of
regular requirements just using the “simple” gateways.****
** **
Best****
** **
Markus****
** **
** **
** **
*From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mauricio Salatino
*Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
*To:* Anurag Aggarwal
*Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
*Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway****
** **
Hi Anurag,****
Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want
to do now. ****
Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND. ****
I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it was
in Drools Flow? Am I right?****
You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
execution? ****
** **
Cheers****
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
wrote:****
Hi Mauricio,****
** **
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that
all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)****
** **
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process****
** **
branch1 ****
/ \****
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)****
\ /****
branch 3****
** **
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the
problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it was
easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not****
** **
Regards, Anurag****
** **
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:****
****
Hi Antoine,****
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
jBPM5? ****
** **
Cheers****
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
wrote:****
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.****
** **
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>
wrote:****
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?****
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.**
**
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
gateway.****
** **
Cheers.****
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
wrote:****
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?****
** **
Antoine****
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
wrote:****
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this
is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom has
this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state of
implementation
Regards,
Anurag****
** **
** **
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev****
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
** **
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
** **
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com****
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
** **
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
11:08 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of the
functionality of this construct.
Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
-is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
-if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
-Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
Please advise.
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
times but
there are also some complex business use case that can complicate the
generic approaches.
Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you
want to achieve.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
> Hi there,****
>
> ** **
>
> just some general remarks from my side:****
>
> ** **
>
> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from
> trivial. See e.g. references below.****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
> ****
>
> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/****
>
> ** **
>
> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you have
> for modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large part of
> regular requirements just using the “simple” gateways.****
>
> ** **
>
> Best****
>
> ** **
>
> Markus****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
> jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mauricio Salatino
> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway****
>
> ** **
>
> Hi Anurag,****
>
> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want
> to do now. ****
>
> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND. ****
>
> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it was
> in Drools Flow? Am I right?****
>
> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
> execution? ****
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers****
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi Mauricio,****
>
> ** **
>
> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that
> all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
> triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)****
>
> ** **
>
> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process****
>
> ** **
>
> branch1 ****
>
> / \****
>
> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)****
>
> \ /****
>
> branch 3****
>
> ** **
>
> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
> branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the
> problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it was
> easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards, Anurag****
>
> ** **
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> Hi Antoine,****
>
> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
> description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
> differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
> jBPM5? ****
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers****
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.****
>
> ** **
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?****
>
> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.*
> ***
>
> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
> gateway.****
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers.****
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?****
>
> ** **
>
> Antoine****
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
> wrote:****
>
> Hi Kris,
>
> How are you
>
> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this
> is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>
> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state
> of implementation
>
> Regards,
> Anurag****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev****
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com****
>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
11:14 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Can you please point me in the spec (Pages) so I can review it and give you
some feedback and estimations?
I'm pretty sure that we can use a complex converging gateway to cover that
features, but I would like to be sure that we are talking about the same
thing.
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description
of the
functionality of this construct.
Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
-is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
-if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
-Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
Please advise.
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times but
> there are also some complex business use case that can complicate the
> generic approaches.
> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you
> want to achieve.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> just some general remarks from my side:****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from
>> trivial. See e.g. references below.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>
>>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>> ****
>>
>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you have
>> for modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large part of
>> regular requirements just using the “simple” gateways.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Best****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Markus****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
>> jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mauricio Salatino
>> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
>> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
>> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Hi Anurag,****
>>
>> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want
>> to do now. ****
>>
>> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND. ****
>>
>> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it
>> was in Drools Flow? Am I right?****
>>
>> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
>> execution? ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Cheers****
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Hi Mauricio,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that
>> all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
>> triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> branch1 ****
>>
>> / \****
>>
>> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)****
>>
>> \ /****
>>
>> branch 3****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
>> branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the
>> problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it was
>> easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
>> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Regards, Anurag****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Hi Antoine,****
>>
>> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
>> description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
>> differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
>> jBPM5? ****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Cheers****
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?****
>>
>> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
>> ****
>>
>> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
>> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
>> gateway.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Cheers.****
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Antoine****
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Hi Kris,
>>
>> How are you
>>
>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this
>> is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>
>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
>> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state
>> of implementation
>>
>> Regards,
>> Anurag****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev****
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com****
>>
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
1:02 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
I would recommend reading pages 292 and 436.
Thanks,
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Can you please point me in the spec (Pages) so I can review it and
give you
some feedback and estimations?
I'm pretty sure that we can use a complex converging gateway to cover that
features, but I would like to be sure that we are talking about the same
thing.
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of
> the functionality of this construct.
> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>
> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
>
> Please advise.
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times but
>> there are also some complex business use case that can complicate the
>> generic approaches.
>> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you
>> want to achieve.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> just some general remarks from my side:****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from
>>> trivial. See e.g. references below.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>>
>>>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>>> ****
>>>
>>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you have
>>> for modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large part of
>>> regular requirements just using the “simple” gateways.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Best****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Markus****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
>>> jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mauricio Salatino
>>> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
>>> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
>>> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Hi Anurag,****
>>>
>>> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you
>>> want to do now. ****
>>>
>>> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND. ****
>>>
>>> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it
>>> was in Drools Flow? Am I right?****
>>>
>>> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
>>> execution? ****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Cheers****
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
>>> wrote:****
>>>
>>> Hi Mauricio,****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that
>>> all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
>>> triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> branch1 ****
>>>
>>> / \****
>>>
>>> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)****
>>>
>>> \ /****
>>>
>>> branch 3****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
>>> branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the
>>> problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it was
>>> easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
>>> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Regards, Anurag****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ****
>>>
>>> Hi Antoine,****
>>>
>>> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the
>>> description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
>>> differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented in
>>> jBPM5? ****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Cheers****
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>>> wrote:****
>>>
>>> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:****
>>>
>>> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?****
>>>
>>> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
>>> ****
>>>
>>> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
>>> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
>>> gateway.****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Cheers.****
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>>> wrote:****
>>>
>>> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> Antoine****
>>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com>
>>> wrote:****
>>>
>>> Hi Kris,
>>>
>>> How are you
>>>
>>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway,
>>> this is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all
>>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>>
>>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
>>> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state
>>> of implementation
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Anurag****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev****
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>
>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>
>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com****
>>>
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>
>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>
>>> ** **
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
2:30 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Great.. i will try to take a look on that and give you some estimations..
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
I would recommend reading pages 292 and 436.
Thanks,
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> Can you please point me in the spec (Pages) so I can review it and give
> you some feedback and estimations?
> I'm pretty sure that we can use a complex converging gateway to cover that
> features, but I would like to be sure that we are talking about the same
> thing.
> Cheers
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>
>> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of
>> the functionality of this construct.
>> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>>
>> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
>> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
>> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
>> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
>>
>> Please advise.
>>
>> Antoine
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times but
>>> there are also some complex business use case that can complicate the
>>> generic approaches.
>>> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you
>>> want to achieve.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi there,****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> just some general remarks from my side:****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from
>>>> trivial. See e.g. references below.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you
>>>> have for modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large
part
>>>> of regular requirements just using the “simple” gateways.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Best****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Markus****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
>>>> jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mauricio Salatino
>>>> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
>>>> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
>>>> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Hi Anurag,****
>>>>
>>>> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you
>>>> want to do now. ****
>>>>
>>>> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND. ****
>>>>
>>>> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it
>>>> was in Drools Flow? Am I right?****
>>>>
>>>> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
>>>> execution? ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Cheers****
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> Hi Mauricio,****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects
>>>> that all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
>>>> triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> branch1 ****
>>>>
>>>> / \****
>>>>
>>>> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)****
>>>>
>>>> \ /****
>>>>
>>>> branch 3****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all
>>>> branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But
the
>>>> problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for AND it
was
>>>> easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR
-
>>>> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Anurag****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ****
>>>>
>>>> Hi Antoine,****
>>>>
>>>> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by
>>>> the description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any
>>>> differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently implemented
in
>>>> jBPM5? ****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Cheers****
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?****
>>>>
>>>> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before
>>>> propagate.****
>>>>
>>>> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
>>>> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex converge
>>>> gateway.****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.****
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> Antoine****
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com>
>>>> wrote:****
>>>>
>>>> Hi Kris,
>>>>
>>>> How are you
>>>>
>>>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway,
>>>> this is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on
all
>>>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>>>
>>>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom
>>>> has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and
state
>>>> of implementation
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Anurag****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev****
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>
>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>
>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com****
>>>>
>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>
>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>>
>>>> ** **
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>
>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
2:45 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Reading the specification, specially the *Inclusive Merge section *
*"The Inclusive Gateway synchronizes a certain subset of branches out of the
set of concurrent incoming branches (merging behavior). "
*
I reach some conclusions that are based on how jBPM5 is doing the handling
of joins and forks:
1) For simple situations we can use the N to M approach. We can specify how
many of the incoming sequence flow will trigger the propagation to the next
node
2) For more complex scenarios where specifying the number of "tokens" that
arrives is not enough we can use a complex converging gateway to define the
logic that needs to be used to propagate the execution to the next node.
I think that I can create an example using a both.. but I want to be sure
that my conclusions fulfill your needs.
Cheers
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Great.. i will try to take a look on that and give you some
estimations..
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
> I would recommend reading pages 292 and 436.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Can you please point me in the spec (Pages) so I can review it and give
>> you some feedback and estimations?
>> I'm pretty sure that we can use a complex converging gateway to cover
>> that features, but I would like to be sure that we are talking about the
>> same thing.
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com>wrote:
>>
>>> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of
>>> the functionality of this construct.
>>> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>>>
>>> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
>>> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
>>> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
>>> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
>>>
>>> Please advise.
>>>
>>> Antoine
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times
>>>> but there are also some complex business use case that can complicate
the
>>>> generic approaches.
>>>> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do
>>>> you want to achieve.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi there,****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> just some general remarks from my side:****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far
from
>>>>> trivial. See e.g. references below.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you
>>>>> have for modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very
large part
>>>>> of regular requirements just using the “simple” gateways.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Best****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Markus****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:
>>>>> jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *On Behalf Of *Mauricio Salatino
>>>>> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
>>>>> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
>>>>> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Anurag,****
>>>>>
>>>>> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do
you
>>>>> want to do now. ****
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND. ****
>>>>>
>>>>> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as
it
>>>>> was in Drools Flow? Am I right?****
>>>>>
>>>>> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the
>>>>> execution? ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers****
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com>
>>>>> wrote:****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Mauricio,****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects
>>>>> that all incoming have been triggered and when it is so - it calls
>>>>> triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the process can continue)****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> branch1 ****
>>>>>
>>>>> / \****
>>>>>
>>>>> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)****
>>>>>
>>>>> \ /****
>>>>>
>>>>> branch 3****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for
>>>>> all branches that were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3).
But
>>>>> the problem is it does not know which branches were triggered (for
AND it
>>>>> was easier - just wait for all branches to be triggered). here in
case of OR
>>>>> - we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards, Anurag****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Antoine,****
>>>>>
>>>>> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by
>>>>> the description it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there
any
>>>>> differences with the AND converging gateway that is currently
implemented in
>>>>> jBPM5? ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers****
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>>>>> wrote:****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <
>>>>> salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?****
>>>>>
>>>>> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before
>>>>> propagate.****
>>>>>
>>>>> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to
>>>>> implement.. and probably you can model that with the complex
converge
>>>>> gateway.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers.****
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com>
>>>>> wrote:****
>>>>>
>>>>> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Antoine****
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com>
>>>>> wrote:****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Kris,
>>>>>
>>>>> How are you
>>>>>
>>>>> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway,
>>>>> this is the gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on
all
>>>>> upstream tokens and propagates token when no upstream token is left
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if
>>>>> jbom has this in roadmap and if you can give some advice on
difficulty and
>>>>> state of implementation
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Anurag****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>>
>>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>>
>>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com****
>>>>>
>>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>>
>>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>>>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>>>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>>>
>>>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jbpm-dev mailing list
>>> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
>> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
>> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>>
>> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>>
>>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
2:22 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Hi Mauricio,
In case of OR we don't not know at design time how many incoming connections would be
triggered before we propagate token. in example below - it can be only one or two or all
three branches based on runtime data (we can not know the value of N)
So it is more of global search as mardo's links illustrate
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 14, 2011, at 1:15 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Reading the specification, specially the Inclusive Merge section
"The Inclusive Gateway synchronizes a certain subset of branches out of the set of
concurrent incoming branches (merging behavior). "
I reach some conclusions that are based on how jBPM5 is doing the handling of joins and
forks:
1) For simple situations we can use the N to M approach. We can specify how many of the
incoming sequence flow will trigger the propagation to the next node
2) For more complex scenarios where specifying the number of "tokens" that
arrives is not enough we can use a complex converging gateway to define the logic that
needs to be used to propagate the execution to the next node.
I think that I can create an example using a both.. but I want to be sure that my
conclusions fulfill your needs.
Cheers
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Great.. i will try to take a look on that and give you some estimations..
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
I would recommend reading pages 292 and 436.
Thanks,
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Can you please point me in the spec (Pages) so I can review it and give you some feedback
and estimations?
I'm pretty sure that we can use a complex converging gateway to cover that features,
but I would like to be sure that we are talking about the same thing.
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of the functionality
of this construct.
Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
-is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
-if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
-Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
Please advise.
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times but there are
also some complex business use case that can complicate the generic approaches.
Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you want to achieve.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
Hi there,
just some general remarks from my side:
the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from trivial. See e.g.
references below.
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you have for modeling,
since from my experience you can cover a very large part of regular requirements just
using the “simple” gateways.
Best
Markus
From: jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Mauricio Salatino
Sent: Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
To: Anurag Aggarwal
Cc: jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
Subject: Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
Hi Anurag,
Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want to do now.
Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it was in Drools
Flow? Am I right?
You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the execution?
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that all incoming
have been triggered and when it is so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
process can continue)
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
branch1
/ \
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
\ /
branch 3
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all branches that
were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just wait for all branches to be
triggered). here in case of OR - we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or
not
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the description it
looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to implement.. and
probably you can model that with the complex converge gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this is the gateway
which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and propagates token
when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom has this in
roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
Regards,
Anurag
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
7:33 a.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
But the rule option looks like solve that problem right? If we create a rule or a set of
rules that analyze the context and based on that decide if it should propagate or not,
solve the problem.
I'm not sure if you are dropping the rule idea for some reason.
Cheers
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Mauricio "Salaboy" Salatino -
On 14/08/2011, at 04:22, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
In case of OR we don't not know at design time how many incoming connections would be
triggered before we propagate token. in example below - it can be only one or two or all
three branches based on runtime data (we can not know the value of N)
So it is more of global search as mardo's links illustrate
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 14, 2011, at 1:15 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
> Reading the specification, specially the Inclusive Merge section
> "The Inclusive Gateway synchronizes a certain subset of branches out of the set
of concurrent incoming branches (merging behavior). "
> I reach some conclusions that are based on how jBPM5 is doing the handling of joins
and forks:
> 1) For simple situations we can use the N to M approach. We can specify how many of
the incoming sequence flow will trigger the propagation to the next node
> 2) For more complex scenarios where specifying the number of "tokens" that
arrives is not enough we can use a complex converging gateway to define the logic that
needs to be used to propagate the execution to the next node.
>
>
> I think that I can create an example using a both.. but I want to be sure that my
conclusions fulfill your needs.
>
> Cheers
>
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Great.. i will try to take a look on that and give you some estimations..
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
> I would recommend reading pages 292 and 436.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you please point me in the spec (Pages) so I can review it and give you some
feedback and estimations?
> I'm pretty sure that we can use a complex converging gateway to cover that
features, but I would like to be sure that we are talking about the same thing.
> Cheers
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of the
functionality of this construct.
> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>
> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
>
> Please advise.
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the times but there
are also some complex business use case that can complicate the generic approaches.
> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what do you want to
achieve.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>
>
> just some general remarks from my side:
>
>
>
> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are far from trivial. See
e.g. references below.
>
>
>
>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>
> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
>
>
>
> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business requirement you have for
modeling, since from my experience you can cover a very large part of regular requirements
just using the “simple” gateways.
>
>
>
> Best
>
>
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org] On
Behalf Of Mauricio Salatino
> Sent: Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
> To: Anurag Aggarwal
> Cc: jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> Subject: Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
>
>
>
> Hi Anurag,
>
> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what do you want to do
now.
>
> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
>
> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging gateway, as it was in Drools
Flow? Am I right?
>
> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to propagate the execution?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio,
>
>
>
> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it expects that all incoming
have been triggered and when it is so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
process can continue)
>
>
>
> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
>
>
>
> branch1
>
> / \
>
> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
>
> \ /
>
> branch 3
>
>
>
> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to wait for all branches that
were actually triggered (say branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just wait for all branches to be
triggered). here in case of OR - we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or
not
>
>
>
> Regards, Anurag
>
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging gateway, by the description
it looks like and AND converging gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
>
> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before propagate.
>
> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy to implement.. and
probably you can model that with the complex converge gateway.
>
>
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme <atoulme(a)intalio.com> wrote:
>
> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an insight ?
>
>
>
> Antoine
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal <anurag(a)intalio.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Kris,
>
> How are you
>
> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging IOR gateway, this is the
gateway which according to bpmn specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
propagates token when no upstream token is left
>
> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was wondering if jbom has this in
roadmap and if you can give some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
>
> Regards,
> Anurag
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
7:53 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Antoine,
While we would like to support all constructs as defined in the BPMN2
specification, we currently do not support the OR gateway yet. Since it
is a rather advanced construct (especially if you start using it in
combination with (unstructured) cycles), we in general recommend users
to try and avoid this complexity by trying to remodel the business
problem using a combination of (the much simpler) XOR and AND gateways.
Therefore, the construct is not yet on any specific release.
The best way if you want to track progress would be to create a JIRA
issue I would say, that we will then use to report progress when
implementing this feature. It would also allow other users to vote for
this issue to keep track of interest.
The implementation would be an extension of the generic Join node (and
JoinInstance), where the logic to decide when to continue would not only
keep track of the "tokens" that already arrived (as is already done in
the current implementation) but would also check for incoming branches
that don't have a "token" yet whether there aren't any active node
instances that could still reach this incoming branch. In most cases
this can be done by simply traversing the process graph. But we could
add support for complex cases, where the graph reachability analysis is
done during process compilation (to avoid runtime overhead) and to
support more complex cases (where for example the join instance would
need to register as a listener to the process instance to make sure it
is re-evaluated whenever necessary).
Kris
Antoine Toulme wrote:
The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description
of the functionality of this construct.
Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
-is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
-if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
-Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
Please advise.
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com
<mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>> wrote:
That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
times but there are also some complex business use case that can
complicate the generic approaches.
Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what
do you want to achieve.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de
<mailto:mardo@abicola.de>> wrote:
Hi there,
just some general remarks from my side:
the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are
far from trivial. See e.g. references below.
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
However, I’d be interested in the concrete business
requirement you have for modeling, since from my experience
you can cover a very large part of regular requirements just
using the “simple” gateways.
Best
Markus
*From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
[mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>] *On Behalf Of
*Mauricio Salatino
*Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
*To:* Anurag Aggarwal
*Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
*Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
Hi Anurag,
Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what
do you want to do now.
Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
I think what you want to implement is N of M converging
gateway, as it was in Drools Flow? Am I right?
You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to
propagate the execution?
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>> wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it
expects that all incoming have been triggered and when it is
so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
process can continue)
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
branch1
/ \
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
\ /
branch 3
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to
wait for all branches that were actually triggered (say
branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just
wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging
gateway, by the description it looks like and AND converging
gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>> wrote:
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before
propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy
to implement.. and probably you can model that with the
complex converge gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>> wrote:
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an
insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>> wrote:
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging
IOR gateway, this is the gateway which according to bpmn
specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
propagates token when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was
wondering if jbom has this in roadmap and if you can give
some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
Regards,
Anurag
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
<http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
<http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
8:03 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
I was thinking for a different situation, instead of transversing the
process graph, insert all the nodes in the working memory, allowing us to
create rules to evaluates situations. I was thinking to do something similar
to the declarative agendas, where the activations are inserted. I think that
this feature will be extremely helpful and we can tackle down situations
like this one.
I will probably create a different thread for that.
Cheers
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Kris Verlaenen <kverlaen(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Antoine,
While we would like to support all constructs as defined in the BPMN2
specification, we currently do not support the OR gateway yet. Since it
is a rather advanced construct (especially if you start using it in
combination with (unstructured) cycles), we in general recommend users
to try and avoid this complexity by trying to remodel the business
problem using a combination of (the much simpler) XOR and AND gateways.
Therefore, the construct is not yet on any specific release.
The best way if you want to track progress would be to create a JIRA
issue I would say, that we will then use to report progress when
implementing this feature. It would also allow other users to vote for
this issue to keep track of interest.
The implementation would be an extension of the generic Join node (and
JoinInstance), where the logic to decide when to continue would not only
keep track of the "tokens" that already arrived (as is already done in
the current implementation) but would also check for incoming branches
that don't have a "token" yet whether there aren't any active node
instances that could still reach this incoming branch. In most cases
this can be done by simply traversing the process graph. But we could
add support for complex cases, where the graph reachability analysis is
done during process compilation (to avoid runtime overhead) and to
support more complex cases (where for example the join instance would
need to register as a listener to the process instance to make sure it
is re-evaluated whenever necessary).
Kris
Antoine Toulme wrote:
> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description
> of the functionality of this construct.
> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>
> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
>
> Please advise.
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
> times but there are also some complex business use case that can
> complicate the generic approaches.
> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what
> do you want to achieve.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de
> <mailto:mardo@abicola.de>> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
>
>
> just some general remarks from my side:
>
>
>
> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are
> far from trivial. See e.g. references below.
>
>
>
>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>
> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
>
>
>
> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business
> requirement you have for modeling, since from my experience
> you can cover a very large part of regular requirements just
> using the “simple” gateways.
>
>
>
> Best
>
>
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> [mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>] *On Behalf Of
> *Mauricio Salatino
> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
>
>
>
> Hi Anurag,
>
> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what
> do you want to do now.
>
> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
>
> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging
> gateway, as it was in Drools Flow? Am I right?
>
> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to
> propagate the execution?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
> <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio,
>
>
>
> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it
> expects that all incoming have been triggered and when it is
> so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
> process can continue)
>
>
>
> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
>
>
>
> branch1
>
> / \
>
> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
>
> \ /
>
> branch 3
>
>
>
> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to
> wait for all branches that were actually triggered (say
> branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
> which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just
> wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
>
>
>
> Regards, Anurag
>
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging
> gateway, by the description it looks like and AND converging
> gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
> gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
> <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
> <salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
>
> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before
> propagate.
>
> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy
> to implement.. and probably you can model that with the
> complex converge gateway.
>
>
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
> <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an
> insight ?
>
>
>
> Antoine
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
> <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Kris,
>
> How are you
>
> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging
> IOR gateway, this is the gateway which according to bpmn
> specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
> propagates token when no upstream token is left
>
> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was
> wondering if jbom has this in roadmap and if you can give
> some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
>
> Regards,
> Anurag
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
8:05 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
That might be possible, but not sure rules would be ideal to do graph
analysis. While in simple cases this would work, performance might blow
up in more complex cases where more complex reachability analysis is
necessary, which can probably be done upfront during compilation as
well, using specialized algorithms.
Kris
Mauricio Salatino wrote:
I was thinking for a different situation, instead of transversing the
process graph, insert all the nodes in the working memory, allowing us
to create rules to evaluates situations. I was thinking to do
something similar to the declarative agendas, where the activations
are inserted. I think that this feature will be extremely helpful and
we can tackle down situations like this one.
I will probably create a different thread for that.
Cheers
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Kris Verlaenen <kverlaen(a)redhat.com
<mailto:kverlaen@redhat.com>> wrote:
Antoine,
While we would like to support all constructs as defined in the BPMN2
specification, we currently do not support the OR gateway yet.
Since it
is a rather advanced construct (especially if you start using it in
combination with (unstructured) cycles), we in general recommend users
to try and avoid this complexity by trying to remodel the business
problem using a combination of (the much simpler) XOR and AND
gateways.
Therefore, the construct is not yet on any specific release.
The best way if you want to track progress would be to create a JIRA
issue I would say, that we will then use to report progress when
implementing this feature. It would also allow other users to
vote for
this issue to keep track of interest.
The implementation would be an extension of the generic Join node (and
JoinInstance), where the logic to decide when to continue would
not only
keep track of the "tokens" that already arrived (as is already done in
the current implementation) but would also check for incoming branches
that don't have a "token" yet whether there aren't any active node
instances that could still reach this incoming branch. In most cases
this can be done by simply traversing the process graph. But we could
add support for complex cases, where the graph reachability
analysis is
done during process compilation (to avoid runtime overhead) and to
support more complex cases (where for example the join instance would
need to register as a listener to the process instance to make sure it
is re-evaluated whenever necessary).
Kris
Antoine Toulme wrote:
> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description
> of the functionality of this construct.
> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>
> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to
implement ?
>
> Please advise.
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>
> <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
> times but there are also some complex business use case that can
> complicate the generic approaches.
> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand
what
> do you want to achieve.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de
<mailto:mardo@abicola.de>
> <mailto:mardo@abicola.de <mailto:mardo@abicola.de>>> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
>
>
> just some general remarks from my side:
>
>
>
> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive
OR-join are
> far from trivial. See e.g. references below.
>
>
>
>
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
>
> http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
>
>
>
> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business
> requirement you have for modeling, since from my experience
> you can cover a very large part of regular requirements just
> using the “simple” gateways.
>
>
>
> Best
>
>
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>>
> [mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>>] *On Behalf Of
> *Mauricio Salatino
> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
>
>
>
> Hi Anurag,
>
> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding
what
> do you want to do now.
>
> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and
AND.
>
> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging
> gateway, as it was in Drools Flow? Am I right?
>
> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to
> propagate the execution?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
> <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>
<mailto:anurag@intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio,
>
>
>
> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it
> expects that all incoming have been triggered and when it is
> so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
> process can continue)
>
>
>
> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
>
>
>
> branch1
>
> / \
>
> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
>
> \ /
>
> branch 3
>
>
>
> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to
> wait for all branches that were actually triggered (say
> branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
> which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just
> wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
>
>
>
> Regards, Anurag
>
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging
> gateway, by the description it looks like and AND converging
> gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
> gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
> <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>
<mailto:atoulme@intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
> <salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>
<mailto:salaboy@gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>>> wrote:
>
> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
>
> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging
before
> propagate.
>
> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very
easy
> to implement.. and probably you can model that with the
> complex converge gateway.
>
>
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
> <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>
<mailto:atoulme@intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>>> wrote:
>
> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an
> insight ?
>
>
>
> Antoine
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
> <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>
<mailto:anurag@intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>>> wrote:
>
> Hi Kris,
>
> How are you
>
> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging
> IOR gateway, this is the gateway which according to bpmn
> specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
> propagates token when no upstream token is left
>
> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was
> wondering if jbom has this in roadmap and if you can
give
> some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
>
> Regards,
> Anurag
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
<http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
<http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
>
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
8:10 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
It will be a more declarative approach than running a complicated
algorithm.. I mean for business situations.. not for pure graph analysis.
you are right. That's why the use case that you are trying to tackle down is
extremely important.
Cheers
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 10:05 PM, Kris Verlaenen <kverlaen(a)redhat.com>wrote:
That might be possible, but not sure rules would be ideal to do
graph
analysis. While in simple cases this would work, performance might blow up
in more complex cases where more complex reachability analysis is necessary,
which can probably be done upfront during compilation as well, using
specialized algorithms.
Kris
Mauricio Salatino wrote:
> I was thinking for a different situation, instead of transversing the
> process graph, insert all the nodes in the working memory, allowing us to
> create rules to evaluates situations. I was thinking to do something similar
> to the declarative agendas, where the activations are inserted. I think that
> this feature will be extremely helpful and we can tackle down situations
> like this one.
> I will probably create a different thread for that.
> Cheers
>
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Kris Verlaenen <kverlaen(a)redhat.com<mailto:
> kverlaen(a)redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> Antoine,
>
> While we would like to support all constructs as defined in the BPMN2
> specification, we currently do not support the OR gateway yet.
> Since it
> is a rather advanced construct (especially if you start using it in
> combination with (unstructured) cycles), we in general recommend users
> to try and avoid this complexity by trying to remodel the business
> problem using a combination of (the much simpler) XOR and AND
> gateways.
> Therefore, the construct is not yet on any specific release.
>
> The best way if you want to track progress would be to create a JIRA
> issue I would say, that we will then use to report progress when
> implementing this feature. It would also allow other users to
> vote for
> this issue to keep track of interest.
>
> The implementation would be an extension of the generic Join node (and
> JoinInstance), where the logic to decide when to continue would
> not only
> keep track of the "tokens" that already arrived (as is already done in
> the current implementation) but would also check for incoming branches
> that don't have a "token" yet whether there aren't any active
node
> instances that could still reach this incoming branch. In most cases
> this can be done by simply traversing the process graph. But we could
> add support for complex cases, where the graph reachability
> analysis is
> done during process compilation (to avoid runtime overhead) and to
> support more complex cases (where for example the join instance would
> need to register as a listener to the process instance to make sure it
> is re-evaluated whenever necessary).
>
> Kris
>
> Antoine Toulme wrote:
> > The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description
> > of the functionality of this construct.
> > Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
> >
> > The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
> > -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
> > -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
> > -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to
> implement ?
> >
> > Please advise.
> >
> > Antoine
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino
> <salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>
> > <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
> > times but there are also some complex business use case that can
> > complicate the generic approaches.
> > Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand
> what
> > do you want to achieve.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de
> <mailto:mardo@abicola.de>
> > <mailto:mardo@abicola.de <mailto:mardo@abicola.de>>>
wrote:
> >
> > Hi there,
> >
> >
> >
> > just some general remarks from my side:
> >
> >
> >
> > the semantics and implementation of the inclusive
> OR-join are
> > far from trivial. See e.g. references below.
> >
> >
> >
> > http://domino.research.ibm.**com/library/cyberdig.nsf/**
>
papers/**331BE249A11C1B3F852577DE003B54**77/$File/rz3791.pdf<http://do...
> >
> >
http://www.springerlink.com/**content/97413825k6141332/<http://www.spr...
> >
> >
> >
> > However, I’d be interested in the concrete business
> > requirement you have for modeling, since from my experience
> > you can cover a very large part of regular requirements just
> > using the “simple” gateways.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best
> >
> >
> >
> > Markus
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:*
jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> >
> >
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> >>
> >
[mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
>
>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> >
> >
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>>>]
> *On Behalf Of
> > *Mauricio Salatino
> > *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
> > *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
> > *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>>
> > *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Anurag,
> >
> > Based on your description I think that I'm understanding
> what
> > do you want to do now.
> >
> > Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and
> AND.
> >
> > I think what you want to implement is N of M converging
> > gateway, as it was in Drools Flow? Am I right?
> >
> > You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to
> > propagate the execution?
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
> > <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>
> <mailto:anurag@intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mauricio,
> >
> >
> >
> > If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it
> > expects that all incoming have been triggered and when it is
> > so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
> > process can continue)
> >
> >
> >
> > In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
> >
> >
> >
> > branch1
> >
> > / \
> >
> > OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
> >
> > \ /
> >
> > branch 3
> >
> >
> >
> > now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to
> > wait for all branches that were actually triggered (say
> > branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
> > which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just
> > wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
> > we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards, Anurag
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Antoine,
> >
> > So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging
> > gateway, by the description it looks like and AND converging
> > gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
> > gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
> > <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>
> <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
> > <salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>
> <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
> >
> > The AND waits for all the branches that are converging
> before
> > propagate.
> >
> > If that's not what you are looking for it should be very
> easy
> > to implement.. and probably you can model that with the
> > complex converge gateway.
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
> > <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>
> <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an
> > insight ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Antoine
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
> > <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>
> <mailto:anurag@intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Kris,
> >
> > How are you
> >
> > Recently one of our requirements came up for converging
> > IOR gateway, this is the gateway which according to bpmn
> > specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
> > propagates token when no upstream token is left
> >
> > Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was
> > wondering if jbom has this in roadmap and if you can
> give
> > some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
> >
> > Regards,
> > Anurag
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > jbpm-dev mailing list
> > jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>>
> >
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
> > - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> > <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/**>
> > - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
> >
> > - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <http://www.plugtree.com/>
> > - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> > <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/**>
> > - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
> >
> > - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> > - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> >
> > - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> > - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> >
> > - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > jbpm-dev mailing list
> > jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>>
> >
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
> > - MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> > - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> > - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> >
> > - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
> >
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > jbpm-dev mailing list
> > jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
> <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.**org <jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>>>
>
> >
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
> >
> >
> >
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> ------------
> >
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > jbpm-dev mailing list
> > jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
> >
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
> >
> ______________________________**_________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
>
>
>
>
> --
> - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com - MyJourney @
> http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
--
- CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
- MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
8:19 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Kris, how hard would it be to implement this ?
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Kris Verlaenen <kverlaen(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Antoine,
While we would like to support all constructs as defined in the BPMN2
specification, we currently do not support the OR gateway yet. Since it is
a rather advanced construct (especially if you start using it in combination
with (unstructured) cycles), we in general recommend users to try and avoid
this complexity by trying to remodel the business problem using a
combination of (the much simpler) XOR and AND gateways. Therefore, the
construct is not yet on any specific release.
The best way if you want to track progress would be to create a JIRA issue
I would say, that we will then use to report progress when implementing this
feature. It would also allow other users to vote for this issue to keep
track of interest.
The implementation would be an extension of the generic Join node (and
JoinInstance), where the logic to decide when to continue would not only
keep track of the "tokens" that already arrived (as is already done in the
current implementation) but would also check for incoming branches that
don't have a "token" yet whether there aren't any active node instances
that
could still reach this incoming branch. In most cases this can be done by
simply traversing the process graph. But we could add support for complex
cases, where the graph reachability analysis is done during process
compilation (to avoid runtime overhead) and to support more complex cases
(where for example the join instance would need to register as a listener to
the process instance to make sure it is re-evaluated whenever necessary).
Kris
Antoine Toulme wrote:
> The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the description of
> the functionality of this construct.
> Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
>
> The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
> -is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
> -if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
> -Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to implement ?
>
> Please advise.
>
> Antoine
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino <salaboy(a)gmail.com<mailto:
> salaboy(a)gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
> times but there are also some complex business use case that can
> complicate the generic approaches.
> Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to understand what
> do you want to achieve.
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de
> <mailto:mardo@abicola.de>> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
>
> just some general remarks from my side:
>
>
> the semantics and implementation of the inclusive OR-join are
> far from trivial. See e.g. references below.
>
>
> http://domino.research.ibm.**com/library/cyberdig.nsf/**papers/**
>
331BE249A11C1B3F852577DE003B54**77/$File/rz3791.pdf<http://domino.rese...
>
>
http://www.springerlink.com/**content/97413825k6141332/<http://www.spr...
>
>
> However, I’d be interested in the concrete business
> requirement you have for modeling, since from my experience
> you can cover a very large part of regular requirements just
> using the “simple” gateways.
>
>
> Best
>
>
> Markus
>
>
>
>
> *From:*
jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org>
>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
> >
>
[mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@**lists.jboss.org<jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>>]
> *On Behalf Of
> *Mauricio Salatino
> *Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
> *To:* Anurag Aggarwal
> *Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
>
> *Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
>
>
> Hi Anurag,
>
> Based on your description I think that I'm understanding what
> do you want to do now.
> Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR and AND.
> I think what you want to implement is N of M converging
> gateway, as it was in Drools Flow? Am I right?
>
> You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to
> propagate the execution?
>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
> <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio,
>
>
> If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it
> expects that all incoming have been triggered and when it is
> so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
> process can continue)
>
>
> In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
>
>
> branch1
> / \
>
> OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
>
> \ /
>
> branch 3
>
>
> now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to
> wait for all branches that were actually triggered (say
> branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
> which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just
> wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of OR -
> we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
>
>
> Regards, Anurag
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Antoine,
>
> So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging
> gateway, by the description it looks like and AND converging
> gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
> gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
> <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
> <salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
>
> The AND waits for all the branches that are converging before
> propagate.
>
> If that's not what you are looking for it should be very easy
> to implement.. and probably you can model that with the
> complex converge gateway.
>
>
> Cheers.
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
> <atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an
> insight ?
>
>
> Antoine
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
> <anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Kris,
>
> How are you
>
> Recently one of our requirements came up for converging
> IOR gateway, this is the gateway which according to bpmn
> specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
> propagates token when no upstream token is left
>
> Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was
> wondering if jbom has this in roadmap and if you can give
> some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
>
> Regards,
> Anurag
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
>
>
>
>
> -- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <
> http://www.plugtree.com/> - MyJourney @
> http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/**>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
> -- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com <
> http://www.plugtree.com/> - MyJourney @
> http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> <http://salaboy.wordpress.com/**>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar <http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
>
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
>
>
> -- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com - MyJourney @
> http://salaboy.wordpress.com
>
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
>
>
>
>
> -- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com - MyJourney @
> http://salaboy.wordpress.com
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
> - Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
> - Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.**org<jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
> >
>
>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
> ------------
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> jbpm-dev mailing list
> jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/**mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev<https://lists.jbos...
>
>
7:07 p.m.
New subject: Re- IOR gateway
Antoine,
I don't think it would be too difficult to implement, most of the logic
/ state is already there (collecting and storing the "tokens" etc.), it
just needs a new type of Join that follows the logic as defined in the
BPMN2 spec. A first step could just put the logic to determine whether
to continue or not by traversing the graph in the JoinInstance. For
more complex cases, an approach where the graph is traversed for each
Join node during process compilation could be done if this is necessary
for performance reasons.
Kris
Antoine Toulme wrote:
Kris, how hard would it be to implement this ?
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Kris Verlaenen <kverlaen(a)redhat.com
<mailto:kverlaen@redhat.com>> wrote:
Antoine,
While we would like to support all constructs as defined in the
BPMN2 specification, we currently do not support the OR gateway
yet. Since it is a rather advanced construct (especially if you
start using it in combination with (unstructured) cycles), we in
general recommend users to try and avoid this complexity by trying
to remodel the business problem using a combination of (the much
simpler) XOR and AND gateways. Therefore, the construct is not
yet on any specific release.
The best way if you want to track progress would be to create a
JIRA issue I would say, that we will then use to report progress
when implementing this feature. It would also allow other users
to vote for this issue to keep track of interest.
The implementation would be an extension of the generic Join node
(and JoinInstance), where the logic to decide when to continue
would not only keep track of the "tokens" that already arrived (as
is already done in the current implementation) but would also
check for incoming branches that don't have a "token" yet whether
there aren't any active node instances that could still reach this
incoming branch. In most cases this can be done by simply
traversing the process graph. But we could add support for
complex cases, where the graph reachability analysis is done
during process compilation (to avoid runtime overhead) and to
support more complex cases (where for example the join instance
would need to register as a listener to the process instance to
make sure it is re-evaluated whenever necessary).
Kris
Antoine Toulme wrote:
The BPMN spec contains the business requirements and the
description of the functionality of this construct.
Anurag also explained the functionality in this thread.
The questions we have for the jBPM team are:
-is this construct on the roadmap ? if yes, for which release ?
-if yes, is there a way to track its development ?
-Overall, what would the work consist and how hard is it to
implement ?
Please advise.
Antoine
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>
<mailto:salaboy@gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>>> wrote:
That's what I mention. it can be easy to implement most of the
times but there are also some complex business use case
that can
complicate the generic approaches.
Looking at a concrete use case will help a lot to
understand what
do you want to achieve.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:53 PM, mardo <mardo(a)abicola.de
<mailto:mardo@abicola.de>
<mailto:mardo@abicola.de <mailto:mardo@abicola.de>>> wrote:
Hi there,
just some general remarks from my side:
the semantics and implementation of the inclusive
OR-join are
far from trivial. See e.g. references below.
http://domino.research.ibm.com/library/cyberdig.nsf/papers/331BE249A11C1B...
http://www.springerlink.com/content/97413825k6141332/
However, I’d be interested in the concrete business
requirement you have for modeling, since from my experience
you can cover a very large part of regular requirements
just
using the “simple” gateways.
Best
Markus
*From:* jbpm-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>>
[mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev-bounces@lists.jboss.org>>] *On Behalf Of
*Mauricio Salatino
*Sent:* Freitag, 12. August 2011 14:21
*To:* Anurag Aggarwal
*Cc:* jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
*Subject:* Re: [jbpm-dev] Re- IOR gateway
Hi Anurag,
Based on your description I think that I'm
understanding what
do you want to do now.
Right now the behaviors implemented in jBPM5 are XOR
and AND.
I think what you want to implement is N of M converging
gateway, as it was in Drools Flow? Am I right?
You want to wait 2 of the 3 branches that you have to
propagate the execution?
Cheers
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 5:47 AM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>
<mailto:anurag@intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>>> wrote:
Hi Mauricio,
If an an AND converging gateway has n incoming branches, it
expects that all incoming have been triggered and when
it is
so - it calls triggerCompleted (so that the rest of the
process can continue)
In case of OR converging, lets assume a process
branch1
/ \
OR (diverging) - branch 2 - OR (converging)
\ /
branch 3
now any of branches may be triggered, OR converging has to
wait for all branches that were actually triggered (say
branch1 and branch 3). But the problem is it does not know
which branches were triggered (for AND it was easier - just
wait for all branches to be triggered). here in case of
OR -
we don't know to continue to wait for branch 2 or not
Regards, Anurag
On Aug 12, 2011, at 1:18 AM, Mauricio Salatino wrote:
Hi Antoine,
So do you want to implement and OR or and AND converging
gateway, by the description it looks like and AND
converging
gateway. Is there any differences with the AND converging
gateway that is currently implemented in jBPM5?
Cheers
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>
<mailto:atoulme@intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>>> wrote:
Hi Mauricio, that's an OR converging gateway.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 12:42 AM, Mauricio Salatino
<salaboy(a)gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>
<mailto:salaboy@gmail.com <mailto:salaboy@gmail.com>>> wrote:
Hi guys.. that's the AND Converging gateway right?
The AND waits for all the branches that are converging
before
propagate.
If that's not what you are looking for it should be
very easy
to implement.. and probably you can model that with the
complex converge gateway.
Cheers.
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Antoine Toulme
<atoulme(a)intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>
<mailto:atoulme@intalio.com <mailto:atoulme@intalio.com>>> wrote:
Broadcasting to list in case other committers have an
insight ?
Antoine
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Anurag Aggarwal
<anurag(a)intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>
<mailto:anurag@intalio.com <mailto:anurag@intalio.com>>> wrote:
Hi Kris,
How are you
Recently one of our requirements came up for converging
IOR gateway, this is the gateway which according to
bpmn
specification syncs up on all upstream tokens and
propagates token when no upstream token is left
Currently jbpm does not support this construct, I was
wondering if jbom has this in roadmap and if you
can give
some advice on difficulty and state of implementation
Regards,
Anurag
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
-- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
<http://www.plugtree.com/> - MyJourney @
http://salaboy.wordpress.com
<http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
<http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
-- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com
<http://www.plugtree.com/> - MyJourney @
http://salaboy.wordpress.com
<http://salaboy.wordpress.com/>
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
<http://www.jbug.com.ar/>
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
-- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com -
MyJourney @ http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
-- - CTO @ http://www.plugtree.com - MyJourney @
http://salaboy.wordpress.com
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jugargentina.org
- Co-Founder @ http://www.jbug.com.ar
- Salatino "Salaboy" Mauricio -
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org
<mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
jbpm-dev mailing list
jbpm-dev(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:jbpm-dev@lists.jboss.org>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jbpm-dev
4884
days inactive
4890
days old
20 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Antoine Toulme -
Anurag Aggarwal -
Kris Verlaenen -
mardo -
Mauricio Salatino -
Salaboy