[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
RE: [bpel-dev] Runtime issues.
|
Hi,
Attached is a document describing initial
thoughts on how the runtime extension point (REP) in BPEL Designer is going to
work. The mechanism described is basic and there are numerous points to “re-think”
in the use cases.
I am in favour of a basic solution, for
the time being, as it will provide us with a mechanism for deploying BPEL
processes onto engines sooner rather than later (can start to realize these use
cases now).
Having said that, now would be a good time
to gather ideas on how to improve the deployment feature in the editor whilst
catering for the needs various runtimes may have. This will allow us to
gradually improve the proposed solution until we reach the 1.0 milestone
release.
As James has mentioned, the WTP server
framework may provide the solution we need for deployment and if not that at
least some inspiration. Philip has kindly offered to share his experiences with
WST as he continues to work on JBI tooling in Eclipse.
-- Bruno
P.S.:
From:
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bruno Wassermann
Sent: 03 May 2006 16:37
To: 'BPEL Designer project
developer discussions.'
Subject: RE: [bpel-dev] Runtime
issues.
At the moment, I know very little about
the WST server framework.
If someone could share the wisdom and help
figure out how to make use of it for our deployment purposes, that would be
greatly appreciated.
-- Bruno
From:
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Philip Dodds
Sent: 03 May 2006 15:24
To: BPEL Designer project
developer discussions.
Subject: Re: [bpel-dev] Runtime
issues.
I have been wondering
whether you could use the org.eclipse.wst.server.core.moduleTypes extension
point of WST to add a jst.bpel module type, this would allow different
servers to add the ability to 'recieve' deployed BPEL projects.
I've just starting digging around in here to add JBI as a module type to allow
a WST registered server to work with a JBI faceted project.
Right now I'm starting to come up to speed for the JBI stuff though there might
be a good opportunity to discuss whether similar principles could be applied to
a BPEL project? Also a good opportunity to share resources on working to
build out new module types (BPEL,JBI etc).
philip
On 5/3/06, James
Moody <James_Moody@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
We haven't yet created such a facet or nature, but it sounds like we
might need one.
And I
think, regardless of runtime restrictions (which may differ from runtime to
runtime) that we *have* to allow the user to create more than one process per
project. So I have a couple of suggestions:
1. We
should look at the server infrastructure provided by the WTP project. This
provides an extensible mechanism for registering "servers" of various
types, a view for managing them (starting, stopping, etc) and also for
deploying projects on them (note that Project is the unit of granularity). This
is a perfect match for what we're doing here.
2.
Under the covers, in the case where the user asks to deploy a project to a sever
that only supports, say, a zip with a single process and some wsdls/xsds, we
can of course do whatever we want - i.e. create one zip for each process in the
workspace, as appropriate. This logic is up to the glue for that particular
runtime.
james
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
wrote on 05/01/2006 05:18:43 PM:
> Is there a plan to make a BPEL facet or
nature so that a project
> type can be created and deployed? I was
wondering if that might be
> a way of integrated deployment to a server?
Similar maybe to the
> EJB deployment infrastructure?
>
> P
>
On 5/1/06, Michal Chmielewski <michal.chmielewski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since
we don't have right now a BPEL project per se (as for example a
> J2EE project, a Web Dynamic Project, etc),
the BPEL process and it's
> locally dependent resources (schemas, wsdls)
sit presumably in some type
> of a project or directory.
>
> So currently it is ok to put several BPEL
processes in the same project.
>
> What are we deploying and validating and
compiling then? A single
> project against a runtime (with many BPEL
processes in it) or just the
> "selected" BPEL process in the project
or both. The grouping of BPEL
> processes into projects is totally arbitrary
and we don't have such
> groupings in the runtime.
>
> Anyhow, thought it should be said.
>
> --
> Michal Chmielewski, CMST, Oracle Corp,
> W:650-506-5952 / M:408-209-9321
>
> "Manuals ?! What manuals ? Son, it's
Unix, you just gotta know."
>
>
_______________________________________________
> 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
|
Attachment:
REP_reqs_usecases.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document