6 Replies Latest reply on Nov 18, 2005 1:57 PM by bkc

    Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?

    bkc

      I have a small process diagram that I want to use a sub-process with. There seems no way to specify a process-state element via the designer. When I hand-edit the processdefinition.xml (by creating a state object as a place-holder, then changing it's type to process-state), jbpm designer gets all confused and no longer opens the processdefinition.xml file. It raises various exceptions depending on how I mangled the processdefinition.xml file.

      Or in other words, I can't find a way to trick the designer into handling process-state.

      Also, it would be nice if the designer could 'do something reasonable' when faced with a missing or corrupted or incomplete gpd.xml file. Maybe just stack all the missing node elements in the corner of the diagram or something.

        • 1. Re: Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?
          koen.aers

          Normally the GPD should stack up the nodes in the topleft corner if the gpd.xml is missing or broken. Could be that this issue is only in case of the process-state node, I'll have to verify on this.
          Process-states will be supported soon as well as a decent default layout algorithm. Rough time estimate for this is end of the year.

          Regards,
          Koen

          • 2. Re: Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?
            jocsch

            same for me with the process-state.

            • 3. Re: Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?
              bkc

              Regarding corrupted gpd.xml

              If you edit a gpd.xml file and don't really know what to put in there, so just put in the <?xml> header..

              Then you'll get an exception opening the processdefinition.xml, something about EOF reading the gpd.xml file

              If you rename gpd.xml to something else, then open the designer on the processdefinition file, you don't get a full designer, just a design and source tab (looks like plain old XML editor)

              So maybe my install isn't working, because gpd.xml has to exist and must have a top-level process-diagram element.

              So then it seems that if I write my processdefinitions w/o the designer, I'll not be able to view them graphically.

              Perhaps there is another tool I can use just to make pretty diagrams for the boss in the meantime?

              graphviz maybe?

              • 4. Re: Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?
                koen.aers

                A workaround would normally be to create a new - empty - processdefinition, close the editor and replace the generated processdefinition.xml by the one you wrote by hand. If you then open the editor by clicking either the gpd.xml or processdefinition.xml, the nodes should be stacked in the topleft corner.

                Hope this helps,
                Koen

                • 5. Re: Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?
                  davidsan1001

                  I manged to create a "pretty" diagram. Here is how I did it.

                  1. Create pretty diagram with whatever graphics tool you choose. Must save as jpg obviously. One current limitaion is that all nodes have to be rectangles..or at least you have to tolerate highlighting with rectangles.

                  2. Now you have to go to work creating your own gpd.xml. You need to use your graphics tool to gather all the coodinates like over all size on jpg and x/y cood.s of all nodes.

                  Limitation of all this is that if you process changes then you have to redo the graphic and gpd.xml (as Ronald mentioned when I brought up this topic.)

                  • 6. Re: Will jbpm Designer support process-state soon?
                    bkc

                    Oh, what I was looking for was a tool to take the processdefinition.xml file and create a graph from that automaticaly.

                    Sure, it wouldn't be great looking, but it would be something until gpd gets further along.