|Re: [bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assist project development|
Another open-source BPEL engine integrated within BPEL Designer sounds fantastic!
There are a few pieces of info about jBPM's characteristics that would help facilitate its integration into BPEL Designer:
- How is deployment going to work (hot-deployment? files & data required by deployment archive)?
- Are there published interfaces to run jBPM's deployment validation or part thereof programmatically?
- (That's all I can think of right now).
It is worth to think carefully about jBPM's requirements on deployment within the BPEL Designer so that the corresponding runtime extension point will cater for its needs. We should probably also work on a set of somewhat detailed use cases describing deployment in BPEL Designer to allow more detailed discussion and let everyone know what to expect.
We (at University College London SSE http://sse.ucl.ac.uk/omii-bpel) currently offer the ActiveBPEL engine to computational scientists and it would be great to be able to have jBPM-BPEL as a potential alternative as this would demonstrate that, when you need to rely on open-source enactment environments (in academia), it doesn't all stand or fall because of a single suitable engine.
We (UCL SSE folks) can offer to stress test jBPM to its limits and beyond with some seriously large-scale workflows to determine and hopefully help to improve its scalability characteristics.
To: BPEL Designer project developer discussions.
Subject: Re: [bpel-dev] Offer of donation of WS-BPEL implementation to assist project development
This looks very interesting! From the jBPM-BPEL roadmap that you outline below, it looks like your dates will line up nicely with those of this project (allowing of course for whatever changes are necessary when WS-BPEL 2.0 is completed). I believe this move will certainly benefit the community.
I'm not a lawyer so I won't comment on the license-related issues, except to say that we should get the Eclipse IP person/people to take a look and confim that it makes them happy.
Bruno: as you've taken a look at the issue of a runtime framework, I'd appreciate it if you could add any comments here.
Let's continue the discussion here of how to proceed on the design of this framework and how to carve up the work among those involved.
bpel-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 04/27/2006 05:05:23 AM:
> We know that the Eclipse-BPEL project is looking for a WS-BPEL 2.0
> engine with which to test. After some discussion within JBoss, it seems
> to us that in the interests of the community as a whole, it might make
> sense for JBoss to donate our jBPM-BPEL runtime for use within the
> project: essentially for this implementation to become the reference for
> Eclipse in the event that other projects have a similar need. jBPM-BPEL
> is licensed under terms that closely approach LGPL except for certain
> amendments required to comply with the IPR statements known to the OASIS
> WS-BPEL TC. Therefore, it should not pose any problems with inclusion or
> use by Eclipse. Because we think this is so important for the community,
> we've spent the last few days looking at the group requirements and
> trying to match them (or vice versa) with the current jBPM development
> goals. As you can see outlined below, we think that this represents a
> good opportunity to catapult the Eclipse-BPEL work forward by several
> months and allow the group as a whole to concentrate on higher-level
> aspects of BPEL design and use, which will benefit all of our users.
> It appears that these are the current Eclipse BPEL milestones:
> M0: December 15
> M1: View Only. January 31
> M2: View and Author simple, exercise extension points. March 7
> M3: View and Author complex, and Validate. May 15
> M4: Deploy and Debug a process to the reference runtime. July 1
> M5: Verify deployment and debug to proprietary runtimes. August 15
> M6 (1.0): Exercise Activity extension. October 1
> The jBPM-BPEL product roadmap has monthly beta releases and a GA release
> at the end of Q2 covering the public review draft of the BPEL
> specification due for release in May.
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 1 31/Mar/06
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 2 28/Apr/06
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 beta 3 26/May/06
> jBPM BPEL 1.0 23/Jun/06
> Once 1.0 GA is out, we will track the specification review process to
> incorporate changes while building new features. Such features include
> communication with the BPEL designer and support for non-normative Web
> Services standards.
> After the OASIS TC finalizes WS-BPEL 2.0 somewhere in Q4, we intend to
> release another GA version with full support as quickly as we can.
> Obviously our current release plans are based purely on this being done
> within JBoss, i.e. resourced entirely by JBoss staff and community
> members. However, if the Eclipse group accepts the contribution of
> jBPM-BPEL we would able to increase the community involvement in order
> to escalate some of these delivery dates, if necessary.
> If accepted, we think that as a group, this Eclipse BPEL project could
> make the following milestones:
> 1. Release Eclipse/jBPM BPEL 1.0 GA covering the BPEL 2 public review
> draft, June 23
> 2. Deliver the framework and the RI for deploying a process, July 1
> 3. Deliver the framework and the RI for debugging a process, August 15
> 4. Release jBPM BPEL 2.0 GA covering the final BPEL 2 spec, November 17
> As mentioned earlier, these dates are probably quite conservative. If
> the entire Eclipse-BPEL community can get behind the development of the
> donated jBPM-BPEL then we may be able to shorten the development
> lifecycle significantly.
> Mark Little (mark.little@xxxxxxxxx)
> Director of Standards
> bpel-dev mailing list
bpel-dev mailing list