variables reorg

[tom.baeyens]

the current execution-variables relation is currently not good enough.

it's too limited for jpdl and xpdl. and bpel uses the variables in the execution scopes.

i'm currently thinking of introducing a VariableScope, which will be maintained in the execution scopes. the member variableMap in ExecutionImpl would be removed.

i'm going to try this and see where i end up. in the mean time all feedback is welcomed.

[tom.baeyens]

as part of this, i think the org.jbpm.var should be merged with pvm. a couple of classes in the org.jbpm.pvm and some of them in org.jbpm.pvm.var

all org.jbpm.var.* packages would then be renamed to org.jbpm.pvm.var.*

makes sense or not ?

[mvaldes]

as part of this, i think the org.jbpm.var should be merged with pvm. a couple of classes in the org.jbpm.pvm and some of them in org.jbpm.pvm.var

all org.jbpm.var.* packages would then be renamed to org.jbpm.pvm.var.*

makes sense or not ?

definetely make sence to me. Variables must be part of the main PVM elements so I agree with you.

the current execution-variables relation is currently not good enough.

it's too limited for jpdl and xpdl. and bpel uses the variables in the execution scopes.

i'm currently thinking of introducing a VariableScope, which will be maintained in the execution scopes. the member variableMap in ExecutionImpl would be removed.

i'm going to try this and see where i end up. in the mean time all feedback is welcomed.

I'm also concerned on variables at activity level (i.e human tasks). Currently Marc has is handling variable inside TaskRuntime objets... what are your plans on having variables at tasks level ?

regards,

[blachonm]

Hi,
just attempting a remark on introducing a Variable Scope maintained in execution scopes (and removal of variable Map).
Current for xpdl extension, variable Map was used to maintain process variables. For activity variables these are maintained in activityRuntimes. And activityRuntimes were stored into the execution scopes.
Regards,
Marc.