3 Replies Latest reply on Jul 5, 2007 5:10 AM by Tom Baeyens

    gravel and jbpm4jsf in the seam based skeleton

    Tom Baeyens Master

      On behalf of Fady:

      Hi all,

      I got the configuration of gravel and the jbpm4jsf running in the skeleton. I will test the tags separately and let you know of the feedback.

      If everything goes smoothly I expect the migration of the web console to Seam will be way quicker.



      I?ll get back to you with more feedback soon.


      Regards,
      Fady


        • 1. Re: gravel and jbpm4jsf in the seam based skeleton
          Tom Baeyens Master

          I assume this is in the context of evaluating for a migration to SEAM. Cause I really want to have a moment where we put all the pro's and con's together before we actually *do* the migration to SEAM.

          Most pro's and con's have been discussed. In the long run, it's definitely the way to go. So mainly, to fit this migration in our current release schedule, we need to know how much time you think such migration is going to take.

          • 2. Re: gravel and jbpm4jsf in the seam based skeleton
            Fady Matar Novice

            Some of the concerns I would highlight is jbpm-identity.

            I believe there should be a tight integration between jbpm-identity and jboss-seam so that the efforts won't be replicated here and there.

            the identity components in seam are pretty good and can be extended to use JAAS or any other repository.

            What we could do in jbpm-identity is use the identity component in seam and build on top of it what is required for jbpm (user information, groups, roles and extended roles with admin privileges)

            What I would suggest is a comparison between the two modules, factor out the common features and add the jbpm functionality on top of this. Can we collaborate with the seam community to achieve this?

            • 3. Re: gravel and jbpm4jsf in the seam based skeleton
              Tom Baeyens Master

               

              "fady.matar" wrote:
              Some of the concerns I would highlight is jbpm-identity.
              ...
              What I would suggest is a comparison between the two modules, factor out the common features and add the jbpm functionality on top of this. Can we collaborate with the seam community to achieve this?


              BAM is our first priority. That is more important then the internal cleanness of the jbpm console implementation.

              So I share your idea that it is a good thing to investigate. But I would like to see BAM features first.

              Apart from identity (also JBoss portal has similar identity needs/component), there is also the email templating in SEAM for which we have a duplicate.

              I want to keep those internal refactorings for later (jbpm 4?) and now build out the featureset of the 3.x series as far as we can with the current infrastructure.