Hi, I am considering using drools with Flow/jBPM as an integral part of a corporate solution. However, it seems to me like the project is dying on the vine. I understand the code is still being worked but overall interest seems to be waning; evidenced by things like, a (...the) jBPM 5 book due two months ago is still MIA. No blog posts on the project for six weeks. I don't mean to bash jBPM, but am just worried about it's future. I suppose the Flow/jBPM merge is irreversible? Any thoughts? Is anyone using another BPM system with drools? Thanks, -J -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Is-Flow-jBPM-dying-on-the-vine-tp402073... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users

What you seem to be looking for is a "Conditional Start Event" where you can define the condition using Drools syntax. What you should do when you want to introduce a "wait point" is to do the merge of you current flow with one of this Conditional Start Event using an Converging Parallel Gateway. The gateway will not continue its execution until all of its branches get executed. That is a 100& BPMN2 solution (you could also use complex gateways, but I'm not sure in which degree are they supported in jBPM5). Another solution, more user friendly and even easier to implement and maintain is to use asynchronous work items that will be completed by rules when certain condition is met. The good thing about this solution is that is easy to create your own task definition to put in the editor palette and that you can create a single work item handler and reuse it for all your 'wait points'. Best Regards, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Esteban Aliverti - Blog @ http://ilesteban.wordpress.com On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, dunnlow <dunnlow(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote: Salaboy, the issue I have is that I want users to be able to see the process graphically, so I think that means I need one overall process (I may use a few sub-processes). Using rules however as you suggest is there a way to "pause" a process until a message (/signal) with certain criteria is inserted? I thought about using a business rule task, with a rule that would always be false (until the node should allow processing to pass through), but I could not get that working. I also saw a suggestion about adding a "Condition" to the metadata for a timer node, but that doesn't seem to be working either. Mark - thanks for the information. I'm looking at flexible processes now and will be in touch with Kris. Thanks again, -J -- View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Is-Flow-jBPM-dying-on-the-vine-tp402073... Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users _______________________________________________ rules-users mailing list rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users