[rules-users] Blurring the lines of jBPM and Drools

[Mark Proctor]

On 21/10/2008 22:26, keithnielsen wrote:
> I have been researching both jBPM and Drools for sometime now and am
> wondering what the future holds for jBPM. This is based on my research of
> Drools 5, which is bringing what I would consider more BPM constructs into
> the core engine, things such as Wait States, Human Tasks, etc. One of the
> main things I don't see yet is the whole persistence and support of long
> running processes. My question is will the trend with Drools continue,
> eventually consuming jBPM?
>
> I must say that my perception is that Drools is more active which makes me
> wonder if I should go with Drools hoping that it builds out more BPM
> features going forward.
Drools Flow is being refactored to be the next jBPM5. So stick with 
Drools Flow for now and you'll be ready to migrate with minimal changes 
to jBPM5 soon, follow the blog and this list for updates.

http://blog.athico.com

Mark
> Thanks