2 Replies Latest reply on Apr 4, 2008 9:53 AM by alesj

    Reliance jBPM - flow definition / bean lifecycle

    alesj

      Defining flow / bean lifecycle
      1) jPDL file
      2) programmatic
      3) from database
      4) custom MC xml --> new schema --> jbossxb.builder
      All 4 would then require new deployer(s), but should be trivial to implement.

      Flow states
      We should be able to add additional states - besides the existing ControllerStates.
      This would then require matching ControllerContextAction(s), to be used when registering new ControllerContext.

      Transparent way to link bean to use the flow
      1) annotation usage, e.g. @Flow("some-flow-name")
      2) custom xml
      The first one looks good enough, specially since we are able to have annotations declared in xml for instance usage or pre Java5.

      Flow action/nodes integrated with MC IoC
      1) cross injection
      1a) injection of existing MC beans into action/nodes
      1b) action/nodes are plain MC beans used in flow definition
      2) extension of existing jPDL schema

      Dependencies
      1) Transition ==> DependencyItem
      1) Action ==> DependencyItem

        • 1. Re: Reliance jBPM - flow definition / bean lifecycle
          tom.baeyens

          while i don't yet know all the details of the lifecycle (e.g. bean lifecycle vs container life cycle) this looks like a very valid use case to leverage jPDL or PVM.

          what is the timeframe that you want to achieve this ? Ideally this could wait a couple of months and then it could be build on jPDL 4. That is what I guess would be the easiest way to do it.

          • 2. Re: Reliance jBPM - flow definition / bean lifecycle
            alesj

             

            "tom.baeyens@jboss.com" wrote:

            what is the timeframe that you want to achieve this?

            The idea is to have this as part of GSoC:
            - http://labs.jboss.com/auth/wiki/GSoC

            "tom.baeyens@jboss.com" wrote:

            Ideally this could wait a couple of months and then it could be build on jPDL 4. That is what I guess would be the easiest way to do it.

            As I see it, we have all the pieces already there, so no need to wait.
            But like discussed, we could perhaps leverage PVM for some parts.
            This needs further investigation, starting a new thread (ps: let's do this after our Wednesday live discussion).