Re: [jdf-dev] [BRMS Quickstart]
by Max Rydahl Andersen
On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 01:32:50PM +0200, Eric D. Schabell wrote:
>> Non-stable plugin updatesite url
>> ================================
>>
>> First issue is the use of http://download.jboss.org/jbosstools/updates/integration/kepler/integration-
>> stack/aggregate/4.1.0/ as the updatesite url to add. This url is *not* a stable url and will not be guaranteed to exist nor contain what will work with your examples. I've asked SOA tooling guys to provide a stable url for community usage but that have not happened yet and thus i'm stuck waiting for them to release a JBDS 7 update url.
>>
>This is what is available and what we have to use.
you could coordinate it with upcoming release and at least document this is *not* the stable url.
>> Besides the url being non-stable it definitely should not be used together with JBDS 5 and 6 since if you add this updatesite to JBDS 5 and 6 and you run Help > Update it will pick up newer versions of eclipse/jbds which probably is *not* what the user wanted/expected. (note, the instructions just seem to talk about JBDS 7so thats fine, just referring to you saying it works on JBDS 5 and 6 too).
>>
>
>The demo project is around so long that we have moved (see releases) through JBDS 5 to 7 now.
Yes, that is fine. Just wanted to point out the sites are specific to eclipse release trains so shouldn't be mixed and matched.
Similarly you don't mix and match fedora rpm repositories from fedora 14, 15 and 16 :)
>> Finally, that url contains *more* than what is supported - i.e. savara tooling is not a supported tech yet. It's the community version as opposed to the supported version.
>>
>Nothing I can do about that.
You could request and use the supported JBDSIS release - we could work with the soa/brms team on getting that available.
>
>> Non-clean pom versioning
>> ========================
>>
>> Second issue is that the GAV's seem to be using the BRMS version for the jars instead of the actual base community version of the jars.
>> i.e. 5.3.1.BRMS seem to be the base for all in here but org.drools and org.jbpm wasn't released under a 5.3.1.* version afaics.
>>
>I am only interested in providing products, this is JBoss BRMS. The upcoming versions are supposed to start supplying maven artifacts into the central jboss repos, but until then, this is the pragmatic solution we have chosen after discussions with jBPM / Drools teams.
Wether you want to provide products or not is irrelevant - the GAV's used should be sane/non-overlapping with neither community or product.
If you have committment and confirmation from jbpm/drools teams that these GAV's are correct/proper and actually the right versions to use as the community base then i'm all good with that.
>> Can't these be updated to actually use the proper versions following the Project Wolf guidelines ?
>>
>Nope.
okey, then you need to convince us that it doesn't cause conflicts on user side.
btw. you do understand the guidelines is just about using proper/consistent naming and versioning ?
>> Note: if jbpm and drools actually released 5.3.1 and that is what BRMS 5.3.1 is based on then we are all good - but that is just not
>> my understanding on how BRMS was built, i.e. jbpm was 5.2.x and drools 5.3.x (according to Julien from productization)
>>
>The primary goal is to use these in the field, allowing them to demo products which we are trying to sell.
Yes, and one of the primary goal of our blessed quickstarts is that they don't mess up users maven and/or eclipse setup/installation.
>The idea of GoldenGate, as preached to me, is to propogate early access to products and not projects. If this is not the case, then you will not want to be reviewing my demos for usage.
I did not mention anything related to this not being ok for products - i'm just pointing out the instructions are pointing to basically unstable content.
>Having worked with drools and jbpm in an enterprise, I don't even want to try and keep Integration & BPM projects aligned and working with the diverse components that are merged into the JBoss BRMS / BPM Suite products.
You aren't using BRMS as a whole, you are using individual parts of it (jbpm, drools,etc.) - those exist in productized versions, the version number of them does not necessarily match up with overall product.
>These demos are specific examples of how to get things done, in JBDS with BRMS plugins as available, on EAP versions. You can't sell what you are describing here above, so no point in my moving from products over to project components.
You are reading my questions wrong - i'm *not* asking you to move over to project components, i'm asking you to follow the guidelines that avoids messing up users installs and uses maven in a Good way.
/max
>
>-- erics
10 years, 11 months
Arquillian Container Adapters in -with-tools BOM
by Rafael Benevides
Hi All.
I'm working on Arquillian Showcase to JDF and I'd like to check with you
all if
Can Container Adapters
(https://docs.jboss.org/author/display/ARQ/Container+adapters) versions
be added to jboss -with-tools BOM.
I know that they have different lifecycles and most of them are not
final versions yet which makes me wonder why we didn't all Adapters on
-with-tools BOM until today.
If is it a desired thing I can add the latest releases to -with-tools
BOM (which allow Arquillian showcase to get this versions from
-with-tools BOM).
Thanks.
--
Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat Brazil
+55-61-9269-6576
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
10 years, 11 months
Re: [jdf-dev] [BRMS Quickstart]
by Max Rydahl Andersen
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 02:31:44PM +0200, Eric D. Schabell wrote:
>https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo/blob/master/Qu...
>https://github.com/eschabell/brms-rewards-demo/blob/master/Quick%20Start%...
>https://github.com/eschabell/brms-coolstore-demo/blob/master/Quick%20Star...
Thanks, and now github stopped showing angry unicorns so I can actually see the examples.
First of, i'm all for getting more examples in, but I'm also really not a fan of handing out instructions/urls that is known to be bad/too temporary.
But lets see what we can do about them - if this just stays in the sandbox and are clearly marked experimental I don't have a problem, having it available is better than to hide it completely.
Non-stable plugin updatesite url
================================
First issue is the use of http://download.jboss.org/jbosstools/updates/integration/kepler/integration-
stack/aggregate/4.1.0/ as the updatesite url to add. This url is *not* a stable url and will not be guaranteed to exist nor contain what will work with your examples. I've asked SOA tooling guys to provide a stable url for community usage but that have not happened yet and thus i'm stuck waiting for them to release a JBDS 7 update url.
Besides the url being non-stable it definitely should not be used together with JBDS 5 and 6 since if you add this updatesite to JBDS 5 and 6 and you run Help > Update it will pick up newer versions of eclipse/jbds which probably is *not* what the user wanted/expected. (note, the instructions just seem to talk about JBDS 7so thats fine, just referring to you saying it works on JBDS 5 and 6 too).
Finally, that url contains *more* than what is supported - i.e. savara tooling is not a supported tech yet. It's the community version as opposed to the supported version.
Non-clean pom versioning
========================
Second issue is that the GAV's seem to be using the BRMS version for the jars instead of the actual base community version of the jars.
i.e. 5.3.1.BRMS seem to be the base for all in here but org.drools and org.jbpm wasn't released under a 5.3.1.* version afaics.
Can't these be updated to actually use the proper versions following the Project Wolf guidelines ?
Note: if jbpm and drools actually released 5.3.1 and that is what BRMS 5.3.1 is based on then we are all good - but that is just not
my understanding on how BRMS was built, i.e. jbpm was 5.2.x and drools 5.3.x (according to Julien from productization)
wdyt ?
/max
>On Aug 6, 2013, at 14:03 , Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:20:18AM +0200, Eric D. Schabell wrote:
>>> Hey Max,
>>>
>>> I have run the originals on JBDS 5, 6 and 7.
>>>
>>> The current ones we branched for this will work on JBDS 6 or 7, as stated in the docs included (QuickStartGuides).
>>
>> neither of those have brms included out of box - which updatesite did you use ?
>>
>> Can you link me to the docs ?
>>
>> /max
>>
>>> -- erics
>>>
>>> On Aug 6, 2013, at 09:39 , Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> github is currently serving angry unicorns so can't see these but I'm wondering how well these loads in jbt/jbds and what versions of JBTIS is needed for these to run out-of-the-box ?
>>>>
>>>> Anyone knows ?
>>>>
>>>> /max
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:19:39PM -0300, Rafael Benevides wrote:
>>>>> This is the first PR of the BRMS quickstarts to align it to JDF Guidelines.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would like a detailed review on this quickstart (specially on the way it is organized since it is a little bit different from all other quickstarts).
>>>>>
>>>>> This are the changes made:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Removed eclipse files (.project, .classpath, .settings)
>>>>> - Added License Headers
>>>>> - Added License to pom.xml
>>>>> - Changed groupId, version and name to match JDF rules
>>>>> - Changed pom property from brms-version to version.brms
>>>>> - Added Readme.md file ( I tried to keep it simple )
>>>>> - Format source code as https://github.com/jboss/ide-config definition
>>>>>
>>>>> The Pull Request with the changes is https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo/pull/3
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like your revision and opinion and since we get an approval (and merge) those changes, I can move forward to update all other quickstarts using the same criteria.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the last, we will add them as git submodule (for each quickstart under a brms-quickstarts folder) on https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart
>>>>>
>>>>> Eric,
>>>>>
>>>>> You did a nice job on those quickstarts!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
>>>>> Red Hat Brazil
>>>>> +55-61-9269-6576
>>>>>
>>>>> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
>>>>> See how it works at redhat.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>>>
>>>
>
10 years, 11 months
New versioning and organisation strategy
by Pete Muir
Hi all,
Rafael, Jason and I did a brainstorm about this at JUDCon Brazil, and came up with the following proposal:
* jdf plugin for forge - longer term needs rolling into Forge core. This is issue https://issues.jboss.org/browse/FORGE-378. As this is proposed for Forge 2, we suggest not altering the version or group id of this plugin
* qstools - version scheme (starting 1.x) is good. Alter group id when we do the next major release only
* quickstarts
- change group id to follow products:
- org.jboss.quickstart.eap, org.jboss.quickstart.jdg etc.
- add a sandbox group id which covers quickstarts not in products
- change versions to follow products major.minor.micro version, with a qualifier to allow bug fixes:
- e.g. 6.0.1-qs-1, 6.0.1-qs-2 etc
* archetypes
- use group id scheme same as quickstarts but use org.jboss.archetype.eap etc.
- follow same version scheme as quickstarts, but use -atype-1 etc.
* BOMs
- use group id scheme same as quickstarts but use org.jboss.bom.eap etc.
- follow same version scheme as quickstarts, but use -bom-1
- projects will be encouraged to create BOMs as well
Let me know what you think,
Pete
10 years, 11 months
Re: [jdf-dev] [BRMS quickstart] doubt on BRMS 5.3.1
by Pete Muir
Right now this is development work to include the quick starts. We still need to consider whether we want to keep them in the sandbox until 6.x BRMS/BPM. We can still include them on the site, we just mark them clearly as experimental (and why, e.g. because of issues like this one).
On 6 Aug 2013, at 09:24, Eric D. Schabell <erics(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Max,
>
> I am thinking that we have been waiting a long time to include some of the integration & BPM products, therefore we have chosen to allow these practices (there is no maven support yet for BRMS/BPMS, coming next release) as the current best practices.
>
> It all imports into JBDS 5,6, and 7 as maven projects, the soa tooling is provided in the docs to make it all work.
>
> Shame to exclude non-mavenized products that provide real value to the users and looking at the JBoss Way, we want very much to attract Integration & BPM dev's.
>
> I find it to be a nice middle ground for the situation at hand.
>
> -- erics
>
> On Aug 6, 2013, at 09:46 , Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Is B not the install script that installs jars directly into the mvn repo with conflicting GAV's or have that been fixed ?
>>
>> Asking since I thought the idea with jdf examples were that they didn't encourage bad practices and was based on supported artifacts,
>> and if something can't provide that these examples should be in the sandbox until solved.
>>
>> (in case I read the mail thread wrong and these examples actually are just in sandbox for now then sorry for the noise - github is all unicorns right now so can't check :/
>>
>>
>>
>> /max
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:17:40AM -0300, Rafael Benevides wrote:
>>> Thanks guys for the help!
>>>
>>> I'll use B.
>>>
>>> Em 25/07/13 07:54, Pete Muir escreveu:
>>>> Agree, we should use B for now, until the 6 series is available. We don't want to merge this down to master until that point anyway.
>>>>
>>>> On 25 Jul 2013, at 11:44, "Eric D. Schabell" <erics(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Rafel,
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no plan to have a BRMS 5.x maven central repo. Never was.
>>>>>
>>>>> I worked with Geoffrey in the Drools team to put together the BOM you find in my projects and the scripted extraction of the maven artifacts and installing these locally is just like it will be once provided by BRMS/BPMS 6.x.
>>>>>
>>>>> As to your possible solutions:
>>>>>
>>>>> A - not a good way to go for the product direction we want to show with the quickstarts. Also community is too volatile to maintain your quickstarts on, there would be a lot of component integration issues, I promise you.
>>>>>
>>>>> B - I would stick with this just for the BRMS 5.x series, later we can move away from this as you see fit.
>>>>>
>>>>> C - doubt you will find any.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hope this helps? I sort of went through all of these problems during creation of these, starting with no maven projects and slowly working through to get them in the state they are in now, sort of mavenized. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> -- erics
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 24, 2013, at 23:37 , Rafael Benevides <benevides(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Updating the info,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I confirmed with Petr Siroky (added to this Thread) that there isn't an available online Maven repo except behind the VPN (http://download.devel.redhat.com/brewroot/repos/soa-brms-5.3-updates-buil...)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think he have to take a decision on how to treat this. Possible solutions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A - Move to Community Artifacts (so we can use -with-drools BOM and Maven Central repository)
>>>>>> B - Use Eric install script which works fine but the setup and the folder structure of the quickstart will not be close as we have on other JDF quickstarts
>>>>>> B.1 - Add the project under ' complex-dependencies' Maven Profile: https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart/blob/master/pom.xml#L266
>>>>>> C - Choose or Think in another way to have the BRMS 5.3.1 maven artifacts available
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that A is the easy way but I don't know if it is the desired.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Still waiting for comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Em 24/07/13 17:16, Rafael Benevides escreveu:
>>>>>>> I'm working on this quickstart
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo
>>>>>>> and I'm
>>>>>>> facing the following:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - This quickstart is target to BRMS 5.3.1
>>>>>>> - BRMS 5.3.1 doesn't have its Maven artifacts online at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - This quickstart uses a manual script to install those artifacts
>>>>>>> locally (
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo/blob/master/in...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> )
>>>>>>> - Quickstarts should use Maven Central or an online Maven repo, right ?
>>>>>>> - This quickstart doesn't use BOMs
>>>>>>> - We have a -with-drools BOM that is target to Drools community project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Questions:
>>>>>>> - Is there another online repo for BRMS 5.3.1 in another place than
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>> - If there isn't an online repo for BRMS 5.3.1, Should we Downgrade this
>>>>>>> quickstart to BRMS 5.3.0 (delivered on WFK 2.3)?
>>>>>>> - If Downgrade, what about JBPM releases (we don't have
>>>>>>> org.jbpm on
>>>>>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/
>>>>>>> ) ?
>>>>>>> - Another possible path: Should we target this quickstart to Community
>>>>>>> or this is not desired?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Comments:
>>>>>>> - It seems that there isn't any BRMS Product Bom at the moment. So
>>>>>>> it will not be using BOMs with we target to Product
>>>>>>> - If target to Community, we can add everything we need in
>>>>>>> -with-drools BOM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I appreciate any comments on this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>
10 years, 11 months
Re: [jdf-dev] [BRMS Quickstart]
by Max Rydahl Andersen
On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:20:18AM +0200, Eric D. Schabell wrote:
>Hey Max,
>
>I have run the originals on JBDS 5, 6 and 7.
>
>The current ones we branched for this will work on JBDS 6 or 7, as stated in the docs included (QuickStartGuides).
neither of those have brms included out of box - which updatesite did you use ?
Can you link me to the docs ?
/max
>-- erics
>
>On Aug 6, 2013, at 09:39 , Max Rydahl Andersen <manderse(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> github is currently serving angry unicorns so can't see these but I'm wondering how well these loads in jbt/jbds and what versions of JBTIS is needed for these to run out-of-the-box ?
>>
>> Anyone knows ?
>>
>> /max
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:19:39PM -0300, Rafael Benevides wrote:
>>> This is the first PR of the BRMS quickstarts to align it to JDF Guidelines.
>>>
>>> I would like a detailed review on this quickstart (specially on the way it is organized since it is a little bit different from all other quickstarts).
>>>
>>> This are the changes made:
>>>
>>> - Removed eclipse files (.project, .classpath, .settings)
>>> - Added License Headers
>>> - Added License to pom.xml
>>> - Changed groupId, version and name to match JDF rules
>>> - Changed pom property from brms-version to version.brms
>>> - Added Readme.md file ( I tried to keep it simple )
>>> - Format source code as https://github.com/jboss/ide-config definition
>>>
>>> The Pull Request with the changes is https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo/pull/3
>>>
>>> I'd like your revision and opinion and since we get an approval (and merge) those changes, I can move forward to update all other quickstarts using the same criteria.
>>>
>>> For the last, we will add them as git submodule (for each quickstart under a brms-quickstarts folder) on https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart
>>>
>>> Eric,
>>>
>>> You did a nice job on those quickstarts!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
>>> Red Hat Brazil
>>> +55-61-9269-6576
>>>
>>> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
>>> See how it works at redhat.com
>>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> jdf-dev mailing list
>>> jdf-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jdf-dev
>>
>
10 years, 11 months
Re: [jdf-dev] [BRMS quickstart] doubt on BRMS 5.3.1
by Pete Muir
Agree, we should use B for now, until the 6 series is available. We don't want to merge this down to master until that point anyway.
On 25 Jul 2013, at 11:44, "Eric D. Schabell" <erics(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Rafel,
>
> There is no plan to have a BRMS 5.x maven central repo. Never was.
>
> I worked with Geoffrey in the Drools team to put together the BOM you find in my projects and the scripted extraction of the maven artifacts and installing these locally is just like it will be once provided by BRMS/BPMS 6.x.
>
> As to your possible solutions:
>
> A - not a good way to go for the product direction we want to show with the quickstarts. Also community is too volatile to maintain your quickstarts on, there would be a lot of component integration issues, I promise you.
>
> B - I would stick with this just for the BRMS 5.x series, later we can move away from this as you see fit.
>
> C - doubt you will find any.
>
> Hope this helps? I sort of went through all of these problems during creation of these, starting with no maven projects and slowly working through to get them in the state they are in now, sort of mavenized. ;)
>
> -- erics
>
> On Jul 24, 2013, at 23:37 , Rafael Benevides <benevides(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Updating the info,
>>
>> I confirmed with Petr Siroky (added to this Thread) that there isn't an available online Maven repo except behind the VPN (http://download.devel.redhat.com/brewroot/repos/soa-brms-5.3-updates-buil...)
>>
>> I think he have to take a decision on how to treat this. Possible solutions:
>>
>> A - Move to Community Artifacts (so we can use -with-drools BOM and Maven Central repository)
>> B - Use Eric install script which works fine but the setup and the folder structure of the quickstart will not be close as we have on other JDF quickstarts
>> B.1 - Add the project under ' complex-dependencies' Maven Profile: https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart/blob/master/pom.xml#L266
>> C - Choose or Think in another way to have the BRMS 5.3.1 maven artifacts available
>>
>> I think that A is the easy way but I don't know if it is the desired.
>>
>> Still waiting for comments.
>>
>> Em 24/07/13 17:16, Rafael Benevides escreveu:
>>> I'm working on this quickstart
>>>
>>> https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo
>>> and I'm
>>> facing the following:
>>>
>>> - This quickstart is target to BRMS 5.3.1
>>> - BRMS 5.3.1 doesn't have its Maven artifacts online at:
>>>
>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/
>>>
>>> - This quickstart uses a manual script to install those artifacts
>>> locally (
>>>
>>> https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo/blob/master/in...
>>>
>>> )
>>> - Quickstarts should use Maven Central or an online Maven repo, right ?
>>> - This quickstart doesn't use BOMs
>>> - We have a -with-drools BOM that is target to Drools community project
>>>
>>>
>>> Questions:
>>> - Is there another online repo for BRMS 5.3.1 in another place than
>>>
>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/
>>> ?
>>> - If there isn't an online repo for BRMS 5.3.1, Should we Downgrade this
>>> quickstart to BRMS 5.3.0 (delivered on WFK 2.3)?
>>> - If Downgrade, what about JBPM releases (we don't have
>>> org.jbpm on
>>> http://maven.repository.redhat.com/techpreview/
>>> ) ?
>>> - Another possible path: Should we target this quickstart to Community
>>> or this is not desired?
>>>
>>> Comments:
>>> - It seems that there isn't any BRMS Product Bom at the moment. So
>>> it will not be using BOMs with we target to Product
>>> - If target to Community, we can add everything we need in
>>> -with-drools BOM
>>>
>>> I appreciate any comments on this
>>>
>>>
>>
>
10 years, 11 months
[BRMS Quickstart]
by Rafael Benevides
This is the first PR of the BRMS quickstarts to align it to JDF Guidelines.
I would like a detailed review on this quickstart (specially on the way
it is organized since it is a little bit different from all other
quickstarts).
This are the changes made:
- Removed eclipse files (.project, .classpath, .settings)
- Added License Headers
- Added License to pom.xml
- Changed groupId, version and name to match JDF rules
- Changed pom property from brms-version to version.brms
- Added Readme.md file ( I tried to keep it simple )
- Format source code as https://github.com/jboss/ide-config definition
The Pull Request with the changes is
https://github.com/eschabell/brms-customer-evaluation-demo/pull/3
I'd like your revision and opinion and since we get an approval (and
merge) those changes, I can move forward to update all other quickstarts
using the same criteria.
For the last, we will add them as git submodule (for each quickstart
under a brms-quickstarts folder) on
https://github.com/jboss-jdf/jboss-as-quickstart
Eric,
You did a nice job on those quickstarts!
--
Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat Brazil
+55-61-9269-6576
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
10 years, 11 months
[BRMS Quickstarts] I think it is ready to go.
by Rafael Benevides
Hi all,
I worked on the following quickstarts/demos:
- brms-customer-evaluation-demo
- brms-coolstore-demo
- brms-rewards-demo
Eric has also the following quickstarts that I think that it's not so
simple to be considered a quickstart (from JDF point of view perspective):
- homeloan-integration-demo - It seems to be more closer to SOAP than BRMS
- brms-car-insurance-demo - There's no source code and all the presented
features are based on the BRMS imported repository.
If you all agree with me, I'll open a PR to include these three BRMS
ported quickstarts above to our repo (as submodule) and them start a
second pass review from Sande.
Thanks
--
Rafael Benevides | Senior Software Engineer
Red Hat Brazil
+55-61-9269-6576
Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
10 years, 12 months