This is a great initiative.. I will spread the word as much as I can!
There are only 4 votes
Let's spread the word! I will try to write a blog post about it
** Minimal support: syntax highlighting for BPMN 2.0 and jPDL **
jPDL definitely not . Syntax highlighting for BPMN2.0 - hmm not sure who in their right mind would want to create BPMN2 by hand (outside of very simple processes). That is why we invest a lot of time into building graphical tooling support for it.
In addition, if this is specific to jBPM you woul have to create a subset of the BPMN2 support for highlighting and using which conforms to what the latest jBPM runtime is supporting..maintenance nightmare if you ask me
Wouldnt you want as support for Intellij for it to be a port of the existing jBPM Eclipse tooling support ??? Why reinvent the wheel here?
In my opinion, having another agnostic BPMN2 editor inside the IntelliJ idea and Netbeans will be great to promote the use of these tools.
I'm not saying that they need to implement all the parsers that now can be shared and reused, but they can build simple editors to open those diagrams in different IDEs. I'm completely against Eclipse and looking at how people is migrating from eclipse/netbeans to intelliJ idea I think that it will be a good idea to have a BPMN2 editor as well as rules syntax highlighting (which already exists).
The first issue you are going to run into is that if you follow the OMG BPMN2 schemas is that OMG does not really consider implemtation/usability when creating their specifications. Tools supporting BPMN2 almost always have to work as close as possible to the specification to make it actually usable.
If you are looking for a "bang for a buck" which I think if you put any work into it should be considered, IMO, putting time and effort into porting the graphical editor features of the Eclipse jBPM tooling into another IDE would be best. The subset of users who actually will want to look and edit and learn BPMN2 by looking at your pretty syntax highlighted code is IMO very small compared to users who would want to graphically generate processes...but again it's just my opinion
Yes, I understand your point, but it should be so difficult I mean, at the end of the day all the IDEs have their graphical tooling with support for graphs and then they just need to hook the bpmn-emf model right? they have 50% of the job done already.
I think that the same happens with BPEL years ago when it becomes standard.
The other interesting thing that we can push forward is to create decouple applications with those editors. Do you know any third party app that is using the eclipse plugin inside an Eclipse RCP application? jBPM5 & Drools should provide this application that only contains the BPMN editor, the Rules editor and the plugins used to deploy all the stuff to the repository in contrast to just the plugins for technical people.
My two cents..
By the way, if we vote the issue the IntelliJ team will do it.. it will not be an effort for the project
Good point. Don't think that exists now.
Don't get me wrong, I'm just saying that if there is community involvement into jBPM which would be so awesoem to have more of, I rather have it go into things that will be more used than others..kinda trying to steer it ..but probably unsuccessfully