Thanks Bruno, this is helpful.
Hi
Koen,
Attached is the
original email that was mentioned about high-level requirements. You should be
able to find the corresponding discussion in the mailing list archives.
Enjoy,
--
Bruno
From:
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Koen Aers Sent: 29 April 2006 10:10 To: BPEL Designer project developer
discussions. Subject: RE:
[bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assistproject
development
Hi
All,
I understand that
there has already been some discussion about high level requirements
concerning the integration of a runtime engine. Where can I find this
discussion? Is it in the newsgroup somewhere or should I have a look in the
mailing list archives?
From:
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Dodds Sent: zaterdag 29 april 2006
3:01 To: B. Wassermann;
BPEL Designer project developer discussions. Subject: Re: [bpel-dev] Offer of
donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assistproject
development
Sounds like an interesting opportunity
to try and make an extracted interface for BPEL engines as I'm just starting
to look at integrating Apache ODE through the ServiceMix engine, so it would
be great if we could look at doing leveraging the jBPM integration.
Just to throw some stuff out there so far we have been looking at
using a JBI Service Engine hot deployment to ServiceMix, trying to
look to extending of the JST/WST components to provide a JBI project,
note sure if that will be the same in jBPM but it would be sweet to be able
to plug-in the engine of your choice?
Cheers
P
On 4/28/06, Bruno Wassermann <B.Wassermann@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
Another open-source
BPEL engine integrated within BPEL Designer sounds fantastic!
There are a few
pieces of info about jBPM's characteristics that would help facilitate its
integration into BPEL Designer:
-
How is deployment
going to work (hot-deployment? files & data required by deployment
archive)?
-
Are there published
interfaces to run jBPM's deployment validation or part thereof
programmatically?
-
(That's all I can
think of right now).
It is worth to
think carefully about jBPM's requirements on deployment within the BPEL
Designer so that the corresponding runtime extension point will cater for
its needs. We should probably also work on a set of somewhat detailed use
cases describing deployment in BPEL Designer to allow more detailed
discussion and let everyone know what to expect.
We (at University
College London SSE http://sse.ucl.ac.uk/omii-bpel) currently offer the
ActiveBPEL engine to computational scientists and it would be great to be
able to have jBPM-BPEL as a potential alternative as this would demonstrate
that, when you need to rely on open-source enactment environments (in
academia), it doesn't all stand or fall because of a single suitable engine.
We (UCL SSE folks)
can offer to stress test jBPM to its limits and beyond with some seriously
large-scale workflows to determine and hopefully help to improve its
scalability characteristics.
Regards,
--
Bruno
To: BPEL Designer project developer
discussions. Subject: Re:
[bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assist project
development
Hello Mark,
This looks very interesting!
From the jBPM-BPEL roadmap that you outline below, it looks like your dates
will line up nicely with those of this project (allowing of course for
whatever changes are necessary when WS-BPEL 2.0 is completed). I
believe this move will certainly benefit the community.
I'm not a lawyer so I won't
comment on the license-related issues, except to say that we should get the
Eclipse IP person/people to take a look and confim that it makes them happy.
Bruno: as you've taken a look at
the issue of a runtime framework, I'd appreciate it if you could add any
comments here.
Let's continue the discussion
here of how to proceed on the design of this framework and how to carve up
the work among those involved.
Thanks,
james
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 04/27/2006 05:05:23
AM:
> We know that the Eclipse-BPEL project is looking for
a WS-BPEL 2.0 > engine with
which to test. After some discussion within JBoss, it seems
> to us that in the
interests of the community as a whole, it might make
> sense for JBoss to donate
our jBPM-BPEL runtime for use within the > project: essentially for this implementation to
become the reference for >
Eclipse in the event that other projects have a similar need. jBPM-BPEL
> is licensed under terms
that closely approach LGPL except for certain > amendments required to comply with the IPR
statements known to the OASIS > WS-BPEL TC. Therefore, it should not pose any
problems with inclusion or >
use by Eclipse. Because we think this is so important for the community,
> we've spent the last few
days looking at the group requirements and > trying to match them (or vice versa) with the
current jBPM development >
goals. As you can see outlined below, we think that this represents a
> good opportunity to
catapult the Eclipse-BPEL work forward by several > months and allow the group as a whole to concentrate
on higher-level > aspects of
BPEL design and use, which will benefit all of our
users. >
> It appears that these are
the current Eclipse BPEL milestones: > >
M0: December 15 > M1: View
Only. January 31 > M2: View
and Author simple, exercise extension points. March
7 > M3: View and Author
complex, and Validate. May 15 > M4: Deploy and Debug a process to the reference
runtime. July 1 > M5: Verify
deployment and debug to proprietary runtimes. August
15 > M6 (1.0): Exercise
Activity extension. October 1 > >
The jBPM-BPEL product roadmap has monthly beta releases and a GA release
> at the end of Q2 covering
the public review draft of the BPEL > specification due for release in
May. >
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 1
31/Mar/06 > jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 2
28/Apr/06 > jBPM BPEL 1.0
beta 3 26/May/06 > jBPM BPEL 1.0
23/Jun/06 >
> Once 1.0 GA is out, we
will track the specification review process to > incorporate changes while building new features.
Such features include >
communication with the BPEL designer and support for non-normative Web
> Services
standards. >
> After the OASIS TC
finalizes WS-BPEL 2.0 somewhere in Q4, we intend to
> release another GA version
with full support as quickly as we can. > >
Obviously our current release plans are based purely on this being done
> within JBoss, i.e.
resourced entirely by JBoss staff and community > members. However, if the Eclipse group accepts the
contribution of > jBPM-BPEL
we would able to increase the community involvement in order
> to escalate some of these
delivery dates, if necessary. > > If
accepted, we think that as a group, this Eclipse BPEL project could
> make the following
milestones: >
> 1. Release Eclipse/jBPM
BPEL 1.0 GA covering the BPEL 2 public review > draft, June 23 > 2. Deliver the framework and the RI for deploying a
process, July 1 > 3. Deliver
the framework and the RI for debugging a process, August
15 > 4. Release jBPM BPEL 2.0
GA covering the final BPEL 2 spec, November 17 > > As
mentioned earlier, these dates are probably quite conservative. If
> the entire Eclipse-BPEL
community can get behind the development of the > donated jBPM-BPEL then we may be able to shorten the
development > lifecycle
significantly. >
>
Mark. >
>
---- >
> Mark Little (mark.little@xxxxxxxxx) > Director of Standards >
_______________________________________________ > bpel-dev mailing list > bpel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/bpel-dev
_______________________________________________ bpel-dev
mailing list bpel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/bpel-dev
|